| Case ID |
f9f68fe2-f721-4939-8935-a7acdf73f822 |
| Body |
View case body. Login to View |
| Case Number |
Criminal Appeal No. 162 of 1971 |
| Decision Date |
Jun 01, 1973 |
| Hearing Date |
Jun 01, 1973 |
| Decision |
The appeal was allowed, and the conviction and sentence of the appellant were set aside. The evidence presented was found to be insufficient to support the conviction under the sections alleged. The identification process was deemed inadequate, and the recovery of the bicycle did not sufficiently link the appellant to the crime. The court noted discrepancies in witness testimony and the lack of reliable evidence to uphold the conviction. |
| Summary |
In the case of Sindh High Court Criminal Appeal No. 162 of 1971, the appellant Gulistan challenged his conviction under sections 394 and 397 of the Pakistan Penal Code for robbery. The incident involved a theft where the first informant, Muhammad Yaqoob, reported being attacked and robbed near his shop. The court examined the evidence, including the identification of the accused and the recovery of the stolen bicycle. Significant doubts arose regarding the reliability of the eyewitness testimony and the lack of concrete evidence linking the appellant to the crime. As a result, the court found the conviction unsustainable and allowed the appeal. This case highlights the importance of robust identification procedures and the need for corroborative evidence in criminal prosecutions, particularly in robbery cases. Keywords: robbery, conviction, eyewitness testimony, identification, Pakistan Penal Code, legal appeal. |
| Court |
Sindh High Court
|
| Entities Involved |
Not available
|
| Judges |
TUFAIL ALI A. RAHMAN, C.J
|
| Lawyers |
Not available
|
| Petitioners |
Gulistan
|
| Respondents |
The State
|
| Citations |
1974 SLD 790,
1974 PCRLJ 608
|
| Other Citations |
Not available
|
| Laws Involved |
Pakistan Penal Code
|
| Sections |
394,
397
|