SARWAR SHAH vs State S — 2023 YLR 1997 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH

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

SARWAR SHAH VS State S. 9(c)---Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), S. 342---Possession of narcotics---Appreciation of evidence---Defence plea---Scope---Prosecution case was that 94.700 kilograms of charas lying in four bags was recovered from the vehicle driven by accused---Record showed that the accused had put up a strong defence of false implication on account of enmity with the Anti Narcotics Force Officials which he stuck throughout during cross-examination of witnesses, during his S.342, Cr.P.C statement, whilst giving evidence under oath and by calling two defence witnesses---Brother of the accused gave evidence that the accused was taken away by armed men from his estate agency and he lodged such a report at Police Station which was duly exhibited---Other defence witness of Police Station gave evidence that he received the aforesaid application/report which was entered in the police station register and the application duly received by him was exhibited---First Information Report which was lodged against the accomplices of the Anti Narcotics Force Officer had also been exhibited which when all taken together revealed that the Anti Narcotics Force had a serious enmity with the accused---Circumstances established that the prosecution had failed to prove its case against the accused beyond a reasonable doubt---Appeal against conviction was allowed accordingly. Citation Name: 2023 YLR 1997 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDHBookmark this Case SARWAR SHAH VS State S. 9(c)---Possession of narcotics---Appreciation of evidence---Benefit of doubt---Scope---Prosecution case was that 94.700 kilograms of charas lying in four bags was recovered from the vehicle driven by accused---No registration book or any other proof was exhibited that the accused owned or had any connection with the car which he was allegedly driving and the narcotics were recovered from---No driving license was recovered from the accused and according to his defence he could not even drive---Although it was unusual for such a large amount of narcotics to be foisted, a photo of the boot of the car from where the narcotics were recovered on no one's pointation revealed that the boot also contained a CNG bottle which left very little room to stash such a large quantity of narcotics---Circumstances established that the prosecution had failed to prove its case against the accused beyond a reasonable doubt---Appeal against conviction was allowed accordingly. Citation Name: 2023 YLR 1997 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDHBookmark this Case SARWAR SHAH VS State S. 9(c)---Possession of narcotics---Appreciation of evidence---Safe custody of the recovered substance---Scope---Prosecution case was that 94.700 kilograms of charas lying in four bags was recovered from the vehicle driven by accused---Safe custody of the narcotic from the time of its recovery from the time of it being sent for chemical report was in some doubt as allegedly the narcotic was deposited in the malkhana for two days but no malkhana entry was produced and the person in charge of the malkhana was not examined---Circumstances established that the prosecution had failed to prove its case against the accused beyond a reasonable doubt---Appeal against conviction was allowed accordingly. Citation Name: 2023 YLR 1997 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDHBookmark this Case SARWAR SHAH VS State S. 342---Defence plea---Scope---Court must give due consideration to any defence plea especially raised in the S.342, Cr.P.C. statement---If the court is satisfied that there is a reasonable possibility of the defence case being true then this would react on the whole of the prosecution case and then accused would be entitled to the benefit of the doubt. Citation Name: 2023 YLR 1997 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDHBookmark this Case SARWAR SHAH VS State Benefit of doubt---Principle---Not necessary that there should be many circumstances creating doubts---If there was a single circumstance, which created reasonable doubt in a prudent mind about the guilt of the accused, then the accused will be entitled to the benefit of that doubt not as a matter of grace and concession but as a matter of right.

SARWAR SHAH vs State S — 2023 YLR 1997 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2023 YLR