MIR MUHAMMAD vs State S — 2024 PCrLJ 370 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.

MIR MUHAMMAD VS State S. 9(c)---Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), S. 103---Possession of narcotic---Appreciation of evidence---Search and arrest, mode of---Non-association of private witnesses---Effect---Twenty eight kilograms charas was recovered from the vehicle of the accused persons---Contention of the accused was that no private person was joined in recovery proceedings except Police Officials, which was a violation of S. 103, Cr.P.C.---Validity---As per FIR the complainant party was available at police station where spy appeared and gave information about the offence and when the police party reached near a petrol pump they saw the present accused persons coming in a car; they got it stopped and apprehended the accused and recovered 28 kilograms of charas from their possession---However, it had come in evidence that the accused were arrested from near a petrol pump leading road, which was a thickly populated area and the complainant had sufficient time to call the independent persons of the locality to witness the recovery proceedings but it was not done by him for reasons best known to him and only the police officials who being subordinates to him were made as mashirs of arrest and recovery proceedings---Admittedly, judicial approach had to be conscious in dealing with cases in which entire testimony hinged upon the evidence of Police Officials alone---Provisions of S. 103, Cr.P.C., were not attracted to cases of personal search of accused in narcotic cases but where the alleged recovery was made on a road (as had happened in this case), omission to secure independent mashirs, particularly, in police case could not be brushed aside lightly by the court---No explanation on record was available as to why no independent person either from the place where they received spy information or from the place of incident had been joined to witness the recovery proceedings though it was a day time incident---Circumstances established that the prosecution had failed to prove its case against the accused---Appeal against conviction was allowed, in circumstances.

MIR MUHAMMAD vs State S — 2024 PCrLJ 370 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2024 PCRLJ