Citation Name: 2023 YLR 408 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURTBookmark this Case MUHAMMAD SAJJAD 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 YLR 408 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURTBookmark this Case MUHAMMAD SAJJAD VS State S. 9(c)--- Control of Narcotic Substances (Government Analysts) Rules, 2001, R.6---Possession of narcotics---Report of Chemical Analysts---Protocols non-indication of---Per se admissibility---Principle---Twelve packets of charas, total weighing twelve kilograms, was recovered from the secret cavities of the car driven by the accused---Absence of necessary protocols on the Forensic Science Laboratory Report regarding the tests applied for as required under S. 6 of the Control of Narcotic Substances (Government Analysts) Rules, 2001 and uncertainty as to safe custody and safe transmission of the representative samples to the Forensic Science Laboratory was yet another blow to the prosecution case making the Forensic Science Laboratory Report unreliable because neither the Seizing Officer nor Official who had taken the murasilla to the Police Station had said anything as to handing over the representative samples to the Moharrir of the Police Station---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 YLR 408 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURTBookmark this Case MUHAMMAD SAJJAD VS State S. 9(c)---Possession of narcotic---Appreciation of evidence---Benefit of doubt---Prosecution case was that twelve packets of charas, total weighing twelve kilograms, was recovered from the secret cavities of the car driven by the accused---Record showed that the alleged recovery was not made from personal possession of the accused rather it was made from the fuel tank, fixed in the motorcar---Neither the vehicle was registered in the name of accused, nor there was any documents, which could show any nexus with him, nor there was any receipt through which the motorcar was given to him on rent---According to the contents of FIR, the recovery was effected from the motorcar, while report/opinion was sought by the Investigation Agency from the Motor Registering Authority/Forensic Science Laboratory with regard to motorcar through applications---No report/opinion of either of the vehicle was available and that in whose name the vehicle was registered, therefore, in view of the said discrepancy, false implication of the accused in the case by letting off the real culprits by the police could not be ruled out---Patrol-tank from which the illegal stuff was allegedly recovered was neither produced before the court nor it was exhibited to confirm as to whether it was having the capacity to contain such a huge quantity of narcotics, which aspect of the case also made the story of prosecution doubtful---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 YLR 408 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURTBookmark this Case MUHAMMAD SAJJAD VS State S. 9(c)---Possession of narcotic---Appreciation of evidence---Benefit of doubt---Contradictions in the statements of witnesses---Scope---Prosecution case was that twelve packets of charas, total weighing twelve kilograms, was recovered from the secret cavities of the car driven by the accused---Seizing Officer stated in cross-examination that he had detached the fuel tank from the motorcar, while other witness stated in cross-examination that after detaching the fuel tank, it was taken through recovery memo. which was signed by him---Investigating Officer stated that neither the fuel tank was detached from the motorcar nor it was taken into possession nor in that respect there was a recovery memo. on the record---Seizing Officer of the case and Investigating Officer were different persons, however, monogram on each parcel was affixed of third person, without explanation as to whose name the said monogram was prepared and whether any official by the said name was ever posted in the police station, such divergence appearing on the face of evidence also could not be left unnoticed---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 YLR 408 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURTBookmark this Case MUHAMMAD SAJJAD vs State S — 2023 YLR 408 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURT

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2023 YLR