| Case ID |
0a20ce64-1bae-4bf6-9b7c-6d1f263e08db |
| Body |
View case body. Login to View |
| Case Number |
Criminal Appeal No. 425 of 2021 |
| Decision Date |
Nov 17, 2021 |
| Hearing Date |
Nov 11, 2021 |
| Decision |
The High Court acquitted the appellant Syed Anees Hasan of the charges under sections 420, 468, and 471 of the Penal Code, citing the prosecution's failure to prove mens rea. The court noted that the appellant was not directly involved in the forgery and that the evidence presented did not establish his guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. The conviction and sentence imposed by the trial court were set aside, and the appeal was allowed, highlighting the principle that the benefit of doubt must go to the accused. |
| Summary |
In the case of Syed Anees Hasan vs. The State, the Sindh High Court reviewed the conviction of the appellant for cheating and forgery related to a loan obtained through forged property documents. The court emphasized the importance of proving mens rea and actus reus in criminal cases, stating that the prosecution failed to establish that the appellant had the intent to commit the alleged crimes. Due to the lack of direct evidence linking the appellant to the forgery, the court granted him the benefit of the doubt and acquitted him. This case underscores the critical legal standards of reasonable doubt and the necessity for concrete proof in criminal proceedings. Keywords include 'criminal appeal', 'forgery', 'mens rea', 'benefit of doubt', and 'acquittal'. |
| Court |
Sindh High Court
|
| Entities Involved |
Not available
|
| Judges |
Mohammad Karim Khan Agha,
Kausar Sultana Hussain
|
| Lawyers |
Ahmed Ali Hussain,
Gul Faraz Khatak
|
| Petitioners |
Syed Anees Hasan
|
| Respondents |
The STATE
|
| Citations |
2022 YLR 86
|
| Other Citations |
Nasir Abbas v. The State 2011 SCMR 1966,
Tariq Pervez v. The State 1995 SCMR 1345,
Agha Siraj Khan Durrani v. The State 2000 PCr.LJ 1329,
Hakim Ali Zardari v. The State PLD 2002 Lah. 369,
Muzammil Niazi and others v. The State PLD 2003 Kar. 526,
Haji Jamil Ahmad v. Mst. Shahnaz Parveen 2016 PCr.LJ Note 40,
Rehmat v. The State PLD 1977 SC 515,
Syed Mushahid Shah v. Federal Investment Agency 2017 SCMR 1218,
Muhammad Shah v. The State 2010 SCMR 1009,
Zaffar v. The State 2021 YLR 1918,
Nusrat Ali Shar and others v. The State Cr. Appeals Nos. 24-K, 25-K and 26-K of 2018,
Galla Nageswara Rao v. State of Andhra Pradesh 1992 Cr.LJ 2601,
Ch. Sami Ullah v. The State 1984 PCr.LJ 1486,
Maqsood Pervez alias Billa v. The State 2000 SCMR 1859,
Qudratullah v. The State PLD 2017 Pesh. 5,
Muhammad Hussain v. The State 1988 PCr.LJ 2029,
Babu Lal v. The State 2019 PCr.LJ 157,
Ghufran v. The State 2012 PCr.LJ 98
|
| Laws Involved |
Penal Code (XLV of 1860)
|
| Sections |
420,
468,
471
|