Summary
- A Judicial Magistrate South court in Karachi recorded the statement of the complainant under Section 164 of the Criminal Procedure Code during the hearing of a murder case involving alleged drug dealer Anmol, also known as Pinky.
- While addressing the court, the complainant said he had gone to Sher Shah for work and, upon returning, noticed a large crowd gathered at the scene.
- After hearing the testimony, the court formally incorporated the complainant’s statement into the judicial record as part of the ongoing proceedings.
A Judicial Magistrate South court in Karachi recorded the statement of the complainant under Section 164 of the Criminal Procedure Code during the hearing of a murder case involving alleged drug dealer Anmol, also known as Pinky. The statement was recorded in a closed courtroom session that lasted nearly one and a half hours.
While addressing the court, the complainant said he had gone to Sher Shah for work and, upon returning, noticed a large crowd gathered at the scene. When he moved closer, he found a body lying there. He told the court that he later learned about the circumstances surrounding the incident.
During cross-examination, the defense lawyer asked whether police had forced him to file the case. The complainant rejected the allegation, saying he lodged the complaint voluntarily because he believed it was his responsibility as a citizen. He further claimed that police were initially reluctant to register the case and that he spent nearly a month pursuing the matter before authorities finally accepted the complaint.
The complainant also testified that an ambulance and a police vehicle had already reached the location before his arrival. He said the body was later transported to Baghdadi Police Station, where officers carried out an examination.
According to his statement, a small container was recovered from the right pocket of the deceased’s trousers. He said the container carried the inscription “Anmol alias Madam Pinky, Don Name Is Enough” and featured a lion symbol along with other markings. He added that information gathered during the investigation suggested the deceased had a history of drug use and that drug consumption led to the death.
The defense lawyer argued that the FIR did not mention important details about the container, including its color and appearance. In response, the prosecutor stated that an FIR only contains preliminary facts and that more detailed information would be included in the investigation report and supporting documents.
After hearing the testimony, the court formally incorporated the complainant’s statement into the judicial record as part of the ongoing proceedings.
We welcome your contributions! Submit your blogs, opinion pieces, press releases, news story pitches, and news features to [email protected] and [email protected]
