PAK LAW GPT — Pakistan Case Law AI justice scale emblemPAK LAW GPTCase law · Urdu & English

Citation Name: 2024 PCrLJ 190 QUETTA-HIGH-COURT-BALOCHISTANBookmark this Case IBRAHIM alias TAIG vs State Ss — 2024 PCrLJ 190 QUETTA-HIGH-COURT-BALOCHISTAN

Case information

Citation
2024 PCrLJ 190 QUETTA-HIGH-COURT-BALOCHISTAN
Court
Balochistan High Court
Year
2024
Reporter
PCRLJ
Parties
Citation Name: 2024 PCrLJ 190 QUETTA-HIGH-COURT-BALOCHISTANBookmark this Case IBRAHIM alias TAIG vs State Ss
Subject matter
Criminal
Provisions referred to
S. 103---A; S. 103; F---Explosive Substances Act (VI of 1908); Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898); Criminal Procedure Code

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

Judgment text as reported

Citation Name: 2024 PCrLJ 190 QUETTA-HIGH-COURT-BALOCHISTANBookmark this Case IBRAHIM alias TAIG VS State Ss. 7 & 11-F---Explosive Substances Act (VI of 1908), Ss. 4 & 5---Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), S. 103---Act of terrorism---Making or possessing explosives under suspicious circumstances---Membership, support and meetings relating to a Proscribed Organization---Search to be made in presence of witnesses---Appreciation of evidence---Benefit of doubt---Scope---Accused persons were convicted for having been found in possession of explosive substances---Despite prior information, the mandatory provisions of S. 103 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1898 (Cr.P.C.) were not complied with, and no explanation was provided in this regard---Furthermore, there is no evidence on record indicating the involvement of the accused in terrorist activities or their status as previous convicts or hardened criminals---Accused did not resist the police raid nor provide any disclosure following the recovery or discovery of new facts permitted under Art. 40 of the Qanun-e-Shahadat, 1984, nor did they make any confession---Father of an accused person had made a complaint to the Levies that his three sons were present at home, the security personnel came and abducted them on gunpoint, however, the Levies did not register any FIR---Trial Court had misread the evidence by holding that the prosecution had been able to prove its case against the accused; thus, the conclusion arrived at was not sustainable under the law and was liable to be reversed---Appeals were allowed and the impugned judgment was set aside.

Other judgments reported in 2024 PCRLJ

Back to the case-law library · Search Pakistani case law in Urdu or English