Citation Name: 2023 YLR 2579 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURTBookmark this Case MEHBOOB ALI vs State Ss

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 YLR 2579 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURTBookmark this Case MEHBOOB ALI VS State Ss. 9(d) & 11(c)---Possession of narcotics---Safe custody and safe transmission of the samples---Scope---Completeness of the chain of custody is of utmost importance and any break therein or lapse in the control of possession of the samples would be sufficient to create a doubt regarding safe custody and safe transmission of the samples---In such eventualities, reliability of the positive Forensic Science Laboratory Report qua the samples lost its value and could not be relied upon for conviction of accused. Citation Name: 2023 YLR 2579 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURTBookmark this Case MEHBOOB ALI VS State Benefit of doubt---Principle---Slightest doubt occurring in prosecution case is sufficient to acquit the accused. Citation Name: 2023 YLR 2579 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURTBookmark this Case MEHBOOB ALI VS State Benefit of doubt---Principle---Not necessary that there should be many circumstances creating doubts rather a single circumstance, creating reasonable doubt in prudent mind about guilt of accused makes him entitled to its benefit, not as a matter of grace or concession but as a matter of right. Citation Name: 2023 YLR 2579 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURTBookmark this Case MEHBOOB ALI VS State Ss. 9(d) & 11(c)--- Possession of narcotics---Appreciation of evidence---Benefit of doubt---Safe custody of the recovered substances not established---Prosecution case was that 750 grams ICE was recovered from the possession of one accused, 783 grams ICE was recovered from the possession of other accused and 8231 grams charas in eight packets was recovered from their vehicle---Record showed that none of the prosecution witnesses had explained in their examination-in-chief that who had brought the samples to police station and when, and to whom the same were handed over for safe custody---Record showed that ASI/witness had taken only Murasila, card of arrest and recovery memo to police station but his statement was silent regarding the case property rather other ASI/witness, to whom the said documents were handed over by the police witness, admitted that along with Murasila neither case property nor the accused had been produced before him---Constable, who was carrier of the samples to Forensic Science Laboratory, in response to a question in his cross-examination, stated that the parcels were lying with Moharrir in his office---Moharrir recorded his statement only to the extent of handing over the samples to constable and did not utter a single word in his examination-in-chief that the samples had been given to him by Seizing Officer for safe custody---Said witness stated in his cross-examination that he had collected the parcels from Malkhana but admitted that he was not incharge of Malkhana meaning thereby that the samples had not been entrusted to him for safe custody---Thus, if it was presumed that the samples had been kept in Malkhana even then it was shrouded in mystery that who was responsible for safe custody of the samples---Obviously, neither name of the Muharrir or incharge of the Malkhana, to whom the samples had been handed over, could be ascertained from the entire record nor prosecution had examined him before the trial Court for confirmation of safe custody of the samples---Neither copy of the relevant page of Register No. 19 was available on record nor original thereof was produced before the Court to prove that the case property had ever been kept in Malkhana---Hence, the chain of safe custody of samples since the time of separation thereof from the contraband till handing over the same to carrier was broken which had vitiated reliability and conclusiveness of the Forensic Science Laboratory Report--- Appeal against conviction was allowed, in circumstances. Citation Name: 2023 YLR 2579 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURTBookmark this Case MEHBOOB ALI VS State Ss. 9(d) & 11(c)---Possession of narcotics---Appreciation of evidence---Benefit of doubt---Contradictions in statements of witnesses---Effect---Prosecution case was that 750 grams ICE was recovered from the possession of one accused, 783 grams ICE was recovered from the possession of other accused and 8231 grams charas in eight packets was recovered from their vehicle---Minor contradictions in the statements of witnesses do creep with passage of time and could be ignored for safe administration of justice---However, disagreement of the witnesses in their deposition on almost each and every fact of the occurrence could be considered for testing their credibility and integrity---In the present case, not only the Seizing Officer had recorded a self-contradictory statement but most of his assertions had not been confirmed by the remaining witnesses---Thus, the statements recorded by the witnesses in the present case neither rang true nor appeared to be natural, hence, could not be considered for conviction of the accused persons---Appeal against conviction was allowed, in circumstances. Citation Name: 2023 YLR 2579 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURTBookmark this Case MEHBOOB ALI VS State Ss. 9(d) & 11(c)---Possession of narcotics---Appreciation of evidence---Benefit of doubt---Disparity in number of sample parcels---Effect---Prosecution case was that 750 grams ICE was recovered from the possession of one accused, 783 grams ICE was recovered from the possession of other accused and 8231 grams charas in eight packets was recovered from their vehicle---According to FIR, recovery memo and transit receipt, which was placed on file through an application after 16 months of the delivery of samples, total 10 parcels had been prepared regarding the samples on the spot, two pertaining to ICE while Parcel Nos. 4 to 11 contained the samples of 08 packets of charas but it was astonishing that constable/witness had carried only 04 parcels to Forensic Science Laboratory---Record showed that it was copiously clear from the statement of said witness that he had taken only four parcels containing samples of the recovered contraband whereas the report had been received about 10 samples---Such disparity floating on the surface of record created a serious doubt regarding genuineness of the samples and Forensic Science Laboratory Report more particularly when the transit receipt was placed on file at a belated stage without any plausible reason---Record reflected from record that application to Chemical Examiner of the Forensic Laboratory was moved by Seizing Officer though it was not his job at all when he had already parted with the case after making pointation of the place of recovery to Investigating Officer---Appeal against conviction was allowed, in circumstances.

Citation Name: 2023 YLR 2579 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURTBookmark this Case MEHBOOB ALI vs State Ss — 2023 YLR 2579 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURT

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2023 YLR