MEHMOOD HUSSAIN vs State S — 2023 PCrLJN 84 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURT

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

MEHMOOD HUSSAIN VS State S. 9(c)---Possession of narcotics---Appreciation of evidence---Benefit of doubt---Number of Witnesses---Scope---2400 kilograms of opium was recovered from the truck of the accused---Raiding party was consisting of more than six Police personnel but only two of them had been produced as prosecution witnesses in order to substantiate the charge against the accused---Though the prosecution was not bound to produce all its witnesses on a particular point but when in a case maximum punishment provided was death or imprisonment for life then production of all the available witnesses for their evidence becomes must so that case against the accused was proved beyond any reasonable doubt---Circumstances established that the prosecution had not proved its case against the accused beyond any shadow of doubt---Appeal against conviction was allowed accordingly. S. 9(c)---Possession of narcotics---Appreciation of evidence---Benefit of doubt---Murasila was not scribed at the spot---Scope---2400 kilograms of opium was recovered from the truck of the accused---Recovery of contraband was effected where no murasila was scribed and instead the accused along with vehicle and contraband were brought to police station where the case FIR was chalked out--- Reason advanced by the prosecution for not scribing murasila on the spot was for the security reason---Said explanation was not appealable to prudent mind as the raiding party was comprising of a good number of Police Officials and further the information regarding the smuggling of contraband was received by the complainant in the police station and that too in advance and as such he could have arranged sufficient number of Police officials or even could get police personnel from the police station which he did not do---Omission to the said effect had created dents in the prosecution case as deliberations and false implication of accused during the journey starting from one District to another District could not be ruled out---Circumstances established that the prosecution had not proved its case against the accused beyond any shadow of doubt---Appeal against conviction was allowed accordingly. S. 9(c)---Possession of narcotics---Appreciation of evidence---Benefit of doubt---Safe custody of contrabands---Scope---2400 kilograms of opium was recovered from the truck of the accused---Record showed that the extract from the register-19 had not been produced before the Trial Court to show that during the three days the representative samples had remained in safe custody of the police malkhana---Circumstances established that the prosecution had not proved its case against the accused beyond any shadow of doubt---Appeal against conviction was allowed accordingly. S. 9(c)---Possession of narcotics---Appreciation of evidence---Benefit of doubt---Scope---2400 kilograms of opium was recovered from the truck of the accused---Prosecution had not produced copy of the daily diary to show that the complainant had left the police station for his reaching to the spot along with the Police officials---According to the prosecution, three persons were found sitting in the truck out of whom two were acquitted by the Trial Court and the present accused was convicted on the ground that he was driving the vehicle but important aspect of the case was that no driving license was recovered from him and further as per statement of defense witness, the present accused was not driver of the vehicle rather according to the said deposition, acquitted accused was the driver---Circumstances established that the prosecution had not proved its case against the accused beyond any shadow of doubt---Appeal against conviction was allowed accordingly.

MEHMOOD HUSSAIN vs State S — 2023 PCrLJN 84 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURT

Case information

Judgment text as reported