Citation Name: 2023 MLD 2047 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURTBookmark this Case SHAKEEL AHMAD vs State Benefit of doubt

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

Citation Name: 2023 MLD 2047 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURTBookmark this Case SHAKEEL AHMAD VS State Benefit of doubt---Principle---In case of doubt, the benefit thereof will accrue in favour of the accused as matter of right and not of grace. Citation Name: 2023 MLD 2047 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURTBookmark this Case SHAKEEL AHMAD VS State S. 9(c)---Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984), Art. 129(g)---Recovery of narcotics---Appreciation of evidence---Benefit of doubt---Withholding material witness---Marginal witness to recovery memo given up---Prosecution case was that 44 packets, containing 29 packets of chars and 15 packets of opium were recovered from the secret cavity of the vehicle driven by accused---Record showed that one of the witnesses, who was the second marginal witness to the recovery memo, was abandoned by the prosecution for reasons best known to them---So, in such situation, not only adverse inference under Art. 129(g) of Qanun-e-Shahadat Order, 1984 could be safely drawn, but the legal inference could also be drawn that if the said witness had entered into the witness box then he would not have supported the prosecution case---Circumstances established that the prosecution had failed to prove its case against the accused beyond any shadow of doubt---Appeal against conviction was allowed, in circumstances. Citation Name: 2023 MLD 2047 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURTBookmark this Case SHAKEEL AHMAD VS State S. 9(c)---Recovery of narcotics---Appreciation of evidence---Benefit of doubt---CCTV footage not available---Prosecution case was that 44 packets, containing 29 packets of chars and 15 packets of opium were recovered from the secret cavity of the vehicle driven by accused---Admittedly, the recovery had been effected near Toll Plaza of a motorway but the CCTV footage had not been taken into possession---Even photographs at the time of arrest were not placed on the file which could have corroborated the testimony of Anti Narcotics Force Officials most particularly the statement of complainant/Investigation Officer---By considering the facts and circumstances of the present case it was incumbent upon the prosecution to have brought some corroborative piece of evidence in addition to the evidence referred above---Circumstances established that the prosecution had failed to prove its case against the accused beyond any shadow of doubt---Appeal against conviction was allowed, in circumstances. Citation Name: 2023 MLD 2047 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURTBookmark this Case SHAKEEL AHMAD VS State S. 9(c)---Recovery of narcotics---Appreciation of evidence---Benefit of doubt---Non-production of police daily diary---Prosecution case was that 44 packets, containing 29 packets of chars and 15 packets of opium, were recovered from the secret cavity of the vehicle driven by accused---Record showed that the complainant/Investigation Officer in his cross examination stated that they made their departure and arrival back in the Police Station, but extract of daily diary was not available on the record---Complainant/Investigation Officer in his cross examination admitted that he had not placed on file the extract of the said daily diary regarding his departure and arrival back to the Police Station---It was revolving common practice amongst the Investigation Officers that they lacked interest to collect the material evidence in cases and even no heed was paid to collect the daily diaries from the Police Stations regarding the arrival and departure of all concerned with the investigation of a particular case---These documents could correctly explain the status of the witnesses, their presence at the spot, the time they consumed in reaching to the spot and the names of Police Officials who accompanied them---If such documents were brought on record, the Investigation Officer would lose the courage to manipulate the cases in Police Stations---In the present case, when the complainant/Investigation Officer was questioned regarding the arrival and departure from the Police Station to the spot, he blatantly answered that he did not place on record the daily diary in that respect---Such lack of seriousness of the witness stamped him as an interested witness and his testimony could not wholeheartedly be relied upon---Circumstances established that the prosecution had failed to prove its case against the accused beyond any shadow of doubt---Appeal against conviction was allowed, in circumstances. Citation Name: 2023 MLD 2047 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURTBookmark this Case SHAKEEL AHMAD VS State S. 9(c)---Recovery of narcotics---Appreciation of evidence---Benefit of doubt---Discreditable witness---Prosecution case was that 44 packets, containing 29 packets of chars and 15 packets of opium, were recovered from the secret cavity of the vehicle driven by accused---Complainant/Investigation Officer appeared before the trial Court as witness---From the deposition of said witness, it was abundantly clear that he had been dismissed from service once on the allegations of asking for illegal gratification then again a month or two prior to his examination before the Court he was again arrested in another case by the FIA for receiving illegal gratification---If such was the state of credibility of the prime witness of prosecution on which they expected the Court to impose capital punishment or for that matter life imprisonment, indeed the Court would strive for some strong independent corroboration---In cases of narcotics conviction was based on the testimony of Police Officials and Police Officials were considered to be as good witnesses as any other witness---Reason was that they being member of the respectable law enforcing agencies the Court relied on their testimony and awarded capital punishment to the accused most particularly in cases wherein they had recovered considerable quantity of narcotic which of course was a manic for the society---However when a witness having a dubious record was the main prosecution witness, then how could the prosecution could expect the Court to consider his testimony and award sentence to the accused---When any doubt arise with regard to the credibility of the witnesses then the Court was left with no other choice but to discard such evidence produced by the prosecution---Even then some strong independent corroboration could be looked up but the same was not available in the present case---Circumstances established that the prosecution had failed to prove its case against the accused beyond any shadow of doubt---Appeal against conviction was allowed, in circumstances. Citation Name: 2023 MLD 2047 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURTBookmark this Case SHAKEEL AHMAD VS State S. 9(c)---Recovery of narcotics---Appreciation of evidence---Benefit of doubt---Safe custody of recovered narcotic doubtful---Non-production of relevant evidence---Prosecution case was that 44 packets, containing 29 packets of chars and 15 packets of opium, were recovered from the secret cavity of the vehicle driven by accused---There was no extract of Register-19 and Register-21 on the record---Muharrir/witness had stated that on return of the Investigation Officer to the Police Station he handed over to him the case property and that he made its entry in Register-19---In his cross examination said witness admitted that he had not brought Register 19 or Register 21 in support of his contention before the Court---Similarly receipt Rahdari and acknowledgement receipt were also not available on the file---Prosecution did not produce Register No. 19 of the Police Station so as to prove that the case property was ever kept in Malkhana of the Police Station---In that way, the prosecution had wasted the best evidence available with it to establish the safe custody of recovered contraband---Circumstances established that the prosecution had failed to prove its case against the accused beyond any shadow of doubt---Appeal against conviction was allowed, in circumstances.

Citation Name: 2023 MLD 2047 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURTBookmark this Case SHAKEEL AHMAD vs State Benefit of doubt — 2023 MLD 2047 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURT

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2023 MLD