IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, AT KARACHI

Criminal Jail Appeal No. 21 of 2020

  

                                                       

Appellant:                    Syed Qamar Abbas Shah through Mr. Iftikhar Ahmed Shah advocate
 

The State:                      Through Ms. Rubina Qadir, Deputy Prosecutor General Sindh

 

Date of hearing:           24.10.2022

 

Date of judgment:        24.10.2022

 

 

J U D G M E N T

 

IRSHAD ALI SHAH, J.- It is alleged that the appellant committed murder of his wife Mst. Kaneez Akbar by causing her fire shot injuries, for that he was booked and reported upon by the police. After due trial, he was convicted under Section 302(b) PPC and sentenced to undergo life imprisonment and to pay compensation of Rs.500,000/- to the legal heirs of the deceased and in default whereof to undergo simple imprisonment for 06 months with benefit of section 382(b) Cr.P.C, by learned 1st Additional Sessions Judge/MCTC Karachi South vide judgment dated 13.11.2019, which is impugned by the appellant before this Court by preferring the instant appeal from jail.

2.       It is contended by learned counsel for the appellant that the appellant being innocent has been involved in this case falsely by the complainant party by substituting him with the real culprit of the incident and evidence of the P.Ws being doubtful has been believed by learned trial Court without lawful justification, therefore, the appellant is entitled to his acquittal by extending him benefit of doubt.

3.       None has come forward to advance arguments on behalf of the complainant. However, learned DPG for the state by supporting the impugned judgment has sought for dismissal of instant jail appeal by contending that the prosecution has been able to prove its case against the appellant beyond shadow of doubt.

4.       Heard arguments and perused the record.

5.       It was stated by complainant Daniyal Raza and his sister P.W Mst. Hina Batool that their father was a constable in Pakistan Railway, on 27.04.2014, after attending his night duty at Railway Station Cantt., Karachi, he came back at his quarter at about         0330 hours/0345 hours and made a knock on its door, on which they and their mother Mst. Kaneez Akbar woke up, their mother opened the door, their father came inside of the room, sit on the cot, there he was inquired upon by their mother as to whether the rifle with him was loaded or it is empty, he made no reply to it and then proceeded to his room, he was followed their mother, he turned back and then fired at their mother; she after sustaining such fire shot injuries; fell down, on cries, P.Ws Salar and Zafar Abbas came running; their father was apprehended and was locked in the room of the quarter and then they took their injured mother to Jinnah Hospital, there she died of such injury; the incident was then reported to the police by making statement under section 154 Cr.PC; the appellant was formally arrested by P.W I.O/SIP Khadim Hussain, from him was secured the official rifle, which he used in the commission of incident. It, as per I.O/SIP Abdul Malik, on forensic examination, was found matched with the empty secured from the place of incident. The evidence of the complainant and P.W Mst. Hina Batool takes support from the evidence of P.W Zafar Abbas. They have stood by their version on all material points despite lengthy cross-examination. Indeed they were having no reason to have involved their own father falsely in a murder case of their own mother by substituting him with the real culprit of the incident. Whatever is stated by the complainant and her witnesses, as above, takes support from ancillary evidence, the same could not be disbelieved on account of irrelevant and immaterial consistencies with regard to the time of death and arrest of the appellant. In these circumstances, learned trial Court was right to conclude that the prosecution has been able to prove its case against the appellant beyond shadow of doubt. The reason which prevailed with the trial Court for awarding lesser punishment to the appellant obviously was that there was no motive of the incident.

6.       In case of Arshad Beg vs. The State (2017 SCMR 1727), it has been held by Hon’ble Apex Court that;

“5.         This occurrence which took place in the broad daylight occurrence was reported to the Police with due promptitude as the FIR was got registered just after one hour of the occurrence. The ocular account was furnished by brothers of the deceased namely Afzal Beg complainant (PW.6) and Muhammad Ashraf Beg (PW.7). They were cross-examined by the defence at length but they remained consistent on all material aspects of the case. Even otherwise this is a case of single accused and substitution in such like cases is a rare phenomenon as normally kith and kin of the deceased (in this case real brothers) would not implicate an innocent person by letting off the real culprits. Therefore, we hold that both the witnesses of ocular account were present at the spot and had witnessed the occurrence. Ocular account furnished by these witnesses is substantially supported by medical evidence as three firearm injuries were observed on the person of Sharif Beg (deceased) out of which only one was exit would whereas two were entry wounds. Therefore, the prosecution case stood proved against the appellant beyond any shadow of doubt and conviction of the appellant under section 302(b), P.P.C. is fully justified……”

 

7.       In view of the facts and reasons discussed above, it is concluded safely that no case to interfere with the impugned judgment is made out; consequently, the instant jail appeal is dismissed.  

                   JUDGE