Citation Name: 2023 MLD 373 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURTBookmark this Case MUHAMMAD SAEED vs State S

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 373 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURTBookmark this Case MUHAMMAD SAEED VS State S. 9(c)---Possession of narcotic---Appreciation of evidence---Benefit of doubt---Safe custody and safe transmission of samples from the police station to the Forensic Science Laboratory---Scope---Prosecution case was that fifty kilograms of charas in fifty packets were recovered from secret cavities of the car of the accused persons---Record showed that the samples from the police station to Forensic Science Laboratory for its analysis had been handed over to Constable but neither he had been cited as witness on complete challan nor he had been examined to support the version of prosecution regarding the safe transmission of the charas to the Forensic Science Laboratory---By not producing the material witness by the prosecution, there existed no chain to prove the safe custody of the samples to the Forensic Science Laboratory---Missing chain created serious doubts in the authenticity and credibility of the Forensic Science Laboratory Report---Circumstances established that the prosecution had been unable to prove its case against the accused beyond any shadow of doubt---Appeal against conviction was allowed, in circumstances. Citation Name: 2023 MLD 373 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURTBookmark this Case MUHAMMAD SAEED VS State S. 9(c)---Possession of narcotic---Appreciation of evidence---Benefit of doubt---Chemical analysis---Delay of eight days in sending the samples for analysis---Scope---Prosecution case was that fifty kilograms of charas in fifty packets were recovered from secret cavities of the car of the accused persons---According to the Forensic Science Laboratory Report the samples were received there on eighth day of recovery whereas, according to the statement of Seizing Officer, the same were separated for analysis on the day of occurrence with a delay of 08 days without any explanation---Mohrrar of the Police Station had also admitted during his cross examination that he sent the samples after a delay of about 08 days however, nothing for its sending late to the Forensic Science Laboratory had been put forward to be relied upon---Even no plausible explanation had been furnished by the Seizing Officer or by the Investigating Officer to the effect that the samples remained in safe custody from the date of registration of the FIR till its receipt in the Forensic Science Laboratory therefore, safe custody of parcels of samples had not proved by the prosecution in the case, which was mandatory requirement of the law---Statements of Seizing Officer as well as Investigating Officer were silent regarding the safe custody of the samples---Circumstances established that the prosecution had been unable to prove its case against the accused beyond any shadow of doubt--- Appeal against conviction was allowed, in circumstances. Citation Name: 2023 MLD 373 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURTBookmark this Case MUHAMMAD SAEED VS State S. 9(c)---Possession of narcotic---Appreciation of evidence---Benefit of doubt---Statements of witnesses---Inconsistency---Prosecution case was that fifty kilograms of charas in fifty packets were recovered from secret cavities of the car of the accused persons---Record showed that the Investigating Officer and complainant were not consistent with regard to the arrival of Investigating Officer to the spot as the former admitted in his cross examination that he conducted investigation from 1600 hours till 1700 hours however, the complainant had admitted that the Investigating Officer arrived on the spot after 2230 hours---Prosecution also did not establish case against accused/front seater as none of the witnesses had uttered a single word with regard to conscious knowledge of the said accused in respect of the availability of contraband in the vehicle in question---Paramount duty of the prosecution was to lead a trust worthy evidence to enable the court to believe that the accusations made against the accused were just, trust worthy and did not create even a single doubt to bring home the charges against him/them---Circumstances established that the prosecution had been unable to prove its case against the accused beyond any shadow of doubt---Appeal against conviction was allowed, in circumstances. Citation Name: 2023 MLD 373 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURTBookmark this Case MUHAMMAD SAEED VS State S. 9(c)---Possession of narcotic---Appreciation of evidence---Benefit of doubt---Prosecution case was that fifty kilograms of charas in fifty packets were recovered from secret cavities of the car of the accused persons---According to the murasila and statement of Seizing Officer, he recovered 50 packets of charas weighing 50000/-grams (50 KGs) grams from the secret cavities of the vehicle in question but he had only mentioned weighment of two packets i.e. 1000/1000 whereas, failed to mention weighment of remaining 48 packets---Circumstances established that the prosecution had been unable to prove its case against the accused beyond any shadow of doubt---Appeal against conviction was allowed, in circumstances.

Citation Name: 2023 MLD 373 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURTBookmark this Case MUHAMMAD SAEED vs State S — 2023 MLD 373 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURT

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2023 MLD