PAK LAW GPT — Pakistan Case Law AI justice scale emblemPAK LAW GPTCase law · Urdu & English

MUHAMMAD ISMAIL DAHRI vs State Ss — 2022 YLRN 91 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH

Case information

Citation
2022 YLRN 91 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH
Court
Sindh High Court
Year
2022
Parties
MUHAMMAD ISMAIL DAHRI vs State Ss
Subject matter
Criminal
Provisions referred to
S. 7---S; S. 103---K; S. 34; Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)

Fields are extracted from the reported citation and judgment text. Where a detail is not stated in the record, it is not shown.

Judgment text as reported

MUHAMMAD ISMAIL DAHRI VS State Ss. 4 & 5---anti-Terrorism act (XXVII of 1997), S. 7---Sindh arms act (V of 2013), Ss. 23(1)(a) & 34---Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), S. 103---Keeping explosive with intent to endanger life or property, making or possessing explosives under suspicious circumstances, act of terrorism, possessing illicit weapon---appreciation of evidence---Non-association of private witnesses---Scope---Prosecution case was that five Kalashnikovs with magazines, one pistol with magazine, six air craft gun shells were recovered from accused---Record showed that the place of incident was a thickly populated area which was surrounded by houses and there was also a CNG Filling Station and people were available there---Despite that, police did not associate any independent person of the locality to witness the recovery proceedings, however, S.34 Sindh arms act, 2013, had provided a legal cover that Police Officials also could act as witnesses of recovery besides the private persons---Said proviso of S.34 of Sindh arms act provided that any Police Officer or person present on the spot could be witness of search and recovery, therefore, it was prime duty of the police to prefer a private witness if available at the spot to maintain transparency and fairness of the alleged recovery---Court was bound to ensure during the course of the administration of justice that there must be a plausible explanation for non association of witnesses from public---In the present case, no valid reason or plausible explanation had been furnished by the prosecution for non-association of independent witnesses by the police when independent people were available at the place of recovery, which was a thickly populated area---False implication of the accused in that case could not be ruled out---Circumstances established that the prosecution had failed to prove its case against the accused beyond any shadow of reasonable doubt---appeal against conviction was allowed, in circumstances.

Back to the case-law library · Search Pakistani case law in Urdu or English