The Sindh High Court dismissed the appeal of a convict in a murder case, observing that the prosecution proved its case beyond any reasonable doubt.
Appellant Gul Bagh was sentenced to life imprisonment by the additional district and sessions court of Malir for murdering Mohammad Anwar in Gulshan-e-Maymar area. According to the prosecution, the appellant along with other co-accused attacked on Anwar and his other relatives with iron rods, sticks and knives due to dispute over a mosque’s administration on June 29, 2020 and killed Anwar by stabbing through a sharp-edged weapon.
The appellant denied the prosecution allegations and submitted in the statement that he was falsely implicated by the complainant party due to a dispute over his sister's marriage. The appellant’s counsel submitted that the trial court failed to consider the glaring inconsistencies and contradictions in the prosecution's evidence, which, if properly evaluated, would have shattered the prosecution's case.
He questioned the injuries of the complainant of the case and said that he claimed to have sustained injuries but did not produce medical evidence to substantiate his presence at the scene or his injuries.
He said the prosecution failed to produce other injured witnesses, leading to an inference that they did not support the prosecution's version, a point partially conceded by the trial court's acquittal on section 324 PPC. The counsel contended that the postmortem on the deceased was not conducted, which is crucial for determining the exact cause of death and also questioned recovery of the weapon used in the crime.
He submitted that the prosecution's case is solely based on the testimonies of inimical and interested private witnesses, who are relatives of the deceased, and they admitted an old enmity in the deposition.
The additional prosecutor general and the complainant’s counsel defended the conviction and sought dismissal of the appeal. They said that the testimonies of the three direct eyewitnesses were consistent and fully support the prosecution's version of the incident.
A single high court bench headed by Justice Khalid Hussain Shahani, after hearing the arguments of the counsel, observed that all three prosecution witnesses consistently deposed about the presence of the appellant, Gul Bagh, at the scene of the incident and his active role in inflicting knife injuries upon Anwar, leading to his demise.
The court observed that the appellant's defence of false implication due to a marriage dispute, unsupported by any evidence, is a mere bald denial. The court observed that the prosecution has successfully established its case against the appellant beyond a reasonable doubt. It said consistent and credible ocular testimonies of the eyewitnesses, which identify the appellant as the principal offender, are strongly corroborated by the medical evidence proving the unnatural death by sharp-edged weapons, and further by the recovery of the blood-stained crime weapon on the appellant's pointation, the human origin of which is confirmed by forensic analysis.
The court further observed that the trial court, after thorough appreciation of the evidence, rightly convicted the appellant for the offence of murder and no illegality, infirmity, or perversity has been observed in the impugned judgment that would warrant interference and dismissed the appeal.