| Case ID |
3ccb539a-2e50-44d1-a863-806ce6c78278 |
| Body |
View case body. Login to View |
| Case Number |
Special Criminal Anti-Terrorism Jail Appeal No.165 |
| Decision Date |
May 05, 2020 |
| Hearing Date |
Apr 22, 2020 |
| Decision |
The appeal against the conviction of Saleem Devda was allowed. The court found that the evidence presented, particularly from eye-witnesses, was unreliable due to significant delays in lodging the FIR and recording statements. A delay of six days in filing the FIR was deemed unexplained and raised concerns about the integrity of the prosecution's case. The court emphasized the importance of prompt FIRs in maintaining reliability and credibility in criminal cases. Additionally, the prosecution failed to recover a pistol from the appellant, and there was insufficient circumstantial evidence linking him to the crime. As a result, the appellant was acquitted based on the benefit of the doubt. |
| Summary |
This case revolves around the appeal of Saleem Devda against his conviction for murder under the Anti Terrorism Act and the Penal Code. The Sindh High Court scrutinized the prosecution's evidence, particularly focusing on the delays in reporting the crime and recording witness statements. The court highlighted the significance of a prompt FIR in ensuring the credibility of the evidence. Delays, such as the six-day gap in lodging the FIR and a 26-day delay in recording witness statements, were critical factors leading to doubts about the prosecution's case. The court ultimately ruled in favor of the appellant, underscoring the principle of 'benefit of the doubt' in criminal law. This case serves as a vital reference for legal practitioners regarding the importance of timely reporting in criminal cases and the implications of delays on the integrity of the judicial process. |
| Court |
Sindh High Court
|
| Entities Involved |
Not available
|
| Judges |
MOHAMMAD KARIM KHAN AGHA,
ZULFIQAR ALI SANGI
|
| Lawyers |
Muhammad Farooq for Appellant.,
Ali Haider Saleem, Deputy Prosecutor General for the State.
|
| Petitioners |
SALEEM DEVDA
|
| Respondents |
THE STATE
|
| Citations |
2021 SLD 2697,
2021 MLD 1551
|
| Other Citations |
Abdul Ghaffar v. The State 2006 SCMR 56,
Zeeshan Shani v. The State 2012 SCMR 428,
Shewaiz Rasool alias Shabi v. The State 2019 SCMR 1448,
Sabir Hussain v. The State 2014 SCMR 794,
Notice to Police Constable Khizar Hayat PLD 2019 SC 527,
Mubasher v. The State PLD 2015 Lah. 426,
Muhammad Ehasan v. The State 2006 SCMR 1857,
Dadullah and another v. The State 2015 SCMR 856,
Niaz Ud Din v. The State 2011 SCMR 725,
Muhammad Asif v. State 2017 SCMR 486,
Farman Ahmed v. Muhammad Inayat 2007 SCMR 1825
|
| Laws Involved |
Penal Code (XLV of 1860),
Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898),
Anti Terrorism Act, 1997
|
| Sections |
302,
34,
161,
154,
7
|