Muhammad Yousuf vs State S — 2024 PCrLJ 1558 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.

Muhammad Yousuf VS State S. 9(c)---Possession of narcotic substance---Appreciation of evidence---Safe custody of the recovered narcotic substance not proved---Prosecution case was that 25-kilogram charas was recovered from the possession of the accused persons---Complainant had deposed that he deposited the case property in the Malkhana---Complainant did not utter a single word in respect of in charge Malkhana at that time---However, official witness who took the samples to the Chemical Examiner had stated that in-charge Malkhana had handed over the samples to complainant, who had handed over the same to him, which reflected that complainant was not the in-charge of Malkhana and someone else had handed over to him the samples from the Malkhana---Prosecution in order to cover up such lacuna in their case moved an application before the Trial Court under S.540, Cr.P.C, wherein it was mentioned that Malkhana in-charge was SI and at the time of application he was posted in another Province---Subsequently,another application under S.540, Cr.P.C, was moved, wherein the name of In-charge Malkhana was mentioned as complainant stating that name of SI was given mistakenly---Complainant was again examined and he introduced himself to be the in-charge of Malkhana---However, in his earlier deposition, complainant did not depose a single word that he was the in-charge of Malkhana at that time, which conflicted with the evidence of Head Constable, who in clear words stated that in-charge Malkhana had handed over the samples to complainant, who handed over the same to him---This was an afterthought and managed one to bring the case in conformity in respect of proving the safe custody and safe transmission of the narcotic to the Chemical Examiner---Prosecution had not been able to prove the safe custody of alleged charas and did not examine the in-charge Malkhana who was available at that time but instead managed the evidence of complainant to fill the lacuna---Further the alleged charas was recovered on 05.07.2016 and samples were sent to the Chemical Examiner on 07.07.2016---No evidence was available to ascertain as to whether the property was kept in safe custody from its recovery till its arrival at the office of the Chemical Examiner---Therefore, by failing to prove the safe custody of the recovered contraband, the same could not be used against the accused persons in thatregard and the chemical report was of no legal value---Appeal against conviction was allowed, in circumstances.

Muhammad Yousuf vs State S — 2024 PCrLJ 1558 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2024 PCRLJ