SHC sets aside conviction of man in father’s murder case

The Sindh High Court has set aside the life imprisonment of a man in a murder case after the prosecution failed to prove charges. Appellant Hameed Hammad Fahad was sentenced to life imprisonment by an additional district and sessions court (East) for murdering his father in PIB Colony.

According to the prosecution, the appellant committed the murder of his father, Malik Ghulam Mohammad, by causing a fatal injury through a stick. The appellant’s counsel submitted that his client was implicated in the case falsely by his brother in order to settle his dispute with him over property.

He said that there was no eyewitness to the incident and the FIR was registered 12 days after the incident. He submitted that the dying declaration of the deceased was made before an interested person being doubtful in character had been believed by the trial court without lawful justification.

The deputy prosecutor general supported the impugned judgment and sought dismissal of the appeal. He submitted that the delay in the registration of the FIR had been explained plausibly and the dying declaration of the deceased being natural had rightly been believed by the trial court.

A single bench, headed by Justice Irshad Ali Shah, after hearing the arguments of the counsel and perusal of evidence, observed that none of the people were examined who found the father of the complainant in an injured condition and such omission on the part of the prosecution could not be overlooked.

The court observed that the complainant and other witnesses had reported the dying statement of the deceased that he was beaten by the appellant after a delay of 12 days though all of them were under a lawful obligation to report the incident to police promptly.

It further observed that the incident was reported after a delay of 12 days, and that could not be overlooked and it apparently was reflecting consultation and deliberation. The court further said that there were contradictions in the statements of the prosecution witnesses. It observed that none of doctors or medical representatives was examined to prove the health condition of the deceased at the time when he was admitted there in an injured condition and such omission too could not be overlooked on the part of the prosecution. It said the prosecution case was not free from doubts.

The court observed that the prosecution failed to prove charges against the appellant, setting aside the trial court conviction awarded to him in the murder case. It ordered the release of the appellant if not required in other cases.