Sona Khan S/O Imam Bakhsh vs The State
Balochistan High Court · 2023 · Before Hon'ble Justice Iqbal Ahmed Kasi
The instant Criminal Appeals have been preferred by appellants Sona Khan son of Imam Bakhsh and Bashir Ahmed son of Ghous Bakhsh, challenging the validity of the judgment dated 22.11.2022 (“the impugned judgment”) passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Dukki (“the trial Court”), whereby, the appellants were convicted under Section 302 (b), 34 PPC and sentenced imprisonment for life as ta’zir and also sentenced to Criminal Appeal Nos. 619 and 626 of 2022 2 Only for viewing purpose. Contact office for certified copy. suffer rigorous imprisonment for 25 (twenty five) years with the benefit of Section 382-B, Cr.P .C.
2. Since Criminal Appeal No.619 and 626 of 2022 are arising out of the same judgment of the trial Court, therefore, we intendent to dispose of the same through this common judgment.
3. Brief facts arising out of the instant appeal are that complainant Qehar Khan son of Nabi Dad, lodged FIR No.104 of 2019, dated 17.11.2019, with Police Station, Duki, under Sections 302, 365, 342, 344, 201, 34 PPC, alleging therein that on 23.10.2019, his son, namely, Abdul Aziz came to Duki City, on his motorcycle for personal work and not returned to home, thus, he reported the matter to Police Station Duki on 25.10.2019. The complainant further alleged that he started search of his son by his own and after some days Muhammad Saleh and Bara Khan told him that on 23.10.2019 at about 05:00 p.m. they saw his son with Sona Khan, Bashir Ahmed (accused faced trial) and Saleem Khan (absconding accused), while cell phone of his son having numbers 0335-8234406 and 0316- 8522217 was going off. The brother of accused Sona Khan, namely, Khan Muhammad informed Muhammad Rafique that accused persons had murdered his son and thrown his dead body in jungle of Salezai area Duki. On such information, the Police searched and recovered skull, bones, hair, a pair of shoes and pieces of clothes, which were identified by the complainant, as Abdul Aziz (his son). The accused persons after kidnapping son of complainant, committed his Qatl-e- Amad and on such allegations, FIR was lodged. Criminal Appeal Nos. 619 and 626 of 2022 3 Only for viewing purpose. Contact office for certified copy.
4. After registration of FIR, the appellants/accused were arrested, investigated and sent to face trial before the trial Court.
5. A formal charge was framed and read over to the appellants/accused, to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.
6. The prosecution in order to substantiate charge against the appellants/accused produced and examined the following witnesses before the trial Court: PW-1 Qehar Khan. He is the complainant of the case, who produced his written report as Ex.P/1-A. PW-2 Bara Khan, is the eyewitness of the case and identified the accused persons present in the Court. PW-3 Muhammad Saleh, is also the eyewitness of the case and identified the accused persons present in the Court. PW-4 Jan Baig, is recovery witness. He produced the recovery memo of recovered spade as Ex.P/4- A, mobile SIM of deceased Ex.P/4-B, Mobile of deceased as Ex.P/4-C, handkerchief as Ex.P/4-D.
Opening of the judgment. Loading the full judgment on LexPK…