The Sindh High Court (AHC) has dismissed the appeal of a robber against death sentence in a dacoity and murder case.
Abdullah Baloch was sentenced to death by an additional district and sessions court for murdering two employees of a bakery during a dacoity on October 20, 2016, in the Kharadar area.According to the prosecution, the appellant along with an absconding co-accused entered into the bakery in Kharadar and stole cash from the bakery owner and employees of a bread company.
The prosecution maintained that the appellant shot the bakery owner, Mumtaz, and a bread company employee, Akhtar, when they tried to resist and also fled the scene in an injured state. Mumtaz and Akhtar were shifted to a hospital where they were pronounced dead during treatment.
The appellant was arrested later by police from a hospital on the identification from bakery employees who had seen him firing on the bakery owner.A counsel for the appellant submitted that prosecution witnesses were employees of the deceased and the complainant had deposed that firing was made by the absconding co-accused and there were material contradiction in the statement of the prosecution witnesses which could not be sufficient to convict the appellant.
An additional prosecutor general submitted that medical evidence had fully corroborated the ocular account furnished by the eyewitnesses and mere relationship with the deceased was no reason to discard the evidence of the witnesses. He said that the crime weapon was found on the information provided by the appellant and it had matched the empty bullet shells seized from the place of the incident.
A division bench of the SHC comprising Justice Mohammad Karim Khan Agha and Justice Khadim Hussain Tunio after hearing the arguments and perusal of evidence of the case observed that the appellant, being the main culprit, committed robbery and opened fire on two innocent persons on resistance.
The high court observed that the prosecution witnesses supported the prosecution case and the appellant deserved no leniency for ruthlessly taking two lives, depriving two families of their breadwinners.
The bench observed that tge appellant deserved the capital punishment that would act as deterrent against the rise of street crimes in the city in which criminals often mercilessly and without a second thought murdered people on slightest resistance.
The SHC observed that the prosecution had proved its case against the appellant beyond any shadow of doubt and the view taken by the trial court was just, appropriate and within the four corners of the proper administration of justice.
The bench dismissed the appeal and upheld the death sentence awarded to the appellant by the trial court.
