IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, BENCH
AT SUKKUR.
Spl.Anti.Terr. Jail Appeal No. D – 210 of
2017
Before;
Mr. Justice Zafar Ahmed Rajput,
Mr. Justice Irshad
Ali Shah
Appellants: 1. Ghulam
Murtaza son of Dodo Khan Rajper.
2. Illahi
Bux son of Muhammad Saleh Rajper.
Through M/s A.R Faruq Pirzaza and Irshad Hussain Dharejo, Advocates.
Complainant: Through Mr. Safdar
Ali Kanasro, Advocate.
The State: Through
Mr. Zulfiquar Ali Jatoi, A.P.G.
Date of hearing: 16-02-2023.
Date of decision: 16-02-2023.
JUDGMENT
IRSHAD ALI SHAH, J. It
is the case of the prosecution that the appellants with rest of the culprits after
having formed an unlawful assembly and in prosecution of their common object on
account of failure of the complainant party to pay them Bhatta, not only committed murder
of Abdul Waheed by causing him fire shot injuries,
but also caused fire shot injuries to PW Waseem Ahmed
with intention to commit his murder and then went away by making aerial firing
to create harassment/terrorism and causing damage to the petrol pump of the complainant
party, for that they were booked and reported upon. On conclusion of trial, the
appellants and co-accused Ali Fakir @ Ali Muhammad and Zaffar
Ali were convicted u/s 148 PPC and sentenced to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment
for 03 years. In addition to such sentence, the appellants were convicted u/s
302, 149 PPC r/w Section 7 (i)(a) of Anti-Terrorism Act, 1997 sentenced to
undergo Imprisonment for life and to pay compensation Rs. 200,000/- each to the
legal heirs of the deceased and in default whereof to undergo Simple
Imprisonment for 01 years with benefit of section 382 (b) Cr.P.C
by Judge, Anti-Terrorism Court, Naushahro Feroze vide judgment dated 24-11-2017, which is impugned by
the appellants before this Court by preferring the instant appeal from jail.
2. At the very outset, it is stated by
learned counsel for the parties that the appellants were specifically charged for
having formed an unlawful assembly; for committing murder of Abdul Waheed, causing fire shot injuries to PW Waseem Ahmed with intention to commit his murder, making
aerial firing to create harassment/terrorism and causing damage to the petrol
pump of the complainant party on account of its failure to pay Bhatta; the point
for determination was also framed to such effect yet no finding with regard to acquittal
or conviction of the appellants for having made demand for Bhatta, causing fire shot
injuries to PW Waseem Ahmed with intention to commit
his murder, making aerial firing to create harassment/terrorism and causing
damage to the petrol pump of the complainant party has been arrived at by
learned trial Court, which is contrary to the mandate contained by section 367 Cr.P.C,
which call for decision on every aspect of the point so framed for its
determination with reasons. By pointing so, they suggested for remand of the
case for rewriting of the judgment by learned trial Court after providing
chance of hearing to all the concerned on its jurisdiction on the basis of
evidence brought on record.
3. Heard arguments and perused the record.
4. The omissions pointed out by learned
counsels for the parties are borne out of record, same being incurable in terms
of section 537 Cr.P.C have occasioned in failure of
justice. Consequently the impugned judgment only to the extent of appellants is
set aside with direction to learned trial Court to rewrite the same after
providing chance of hearing to all the concerned on point of its jurisdiction
on the basis of evidence brought on record.
5. The instant Crl.
Jail Appeal is disposed of accordingly.
J U D G E
J U D G E
Nasim/P.A