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

Citation Name: 2024 PCrLJ 678 QUETTA-HIGH-COURT-BALOCHISTANBookmark this Case KHALIQ DAD vs State S — 2024 PCrLJ 678 QUETTA-HIGH-COURT-BALOCHISTAN

Case information

Citation
2024 PCrLJ 678 QUETTA-HIGH-COURT-BALOCHISTAN
Court
Balochistan High Court
Year
2024
Reporter
PCRLJ
Parties
Citation Name: 2024 PCrLJ 678 QUETTA-HIGH-COURT-BALOCHISTANBookmark this Case KHALIQ DAD vs State S
Subject matter
Criminal
Provisions referred to
S. 9

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 678 QUETTA-HIGH-COURT-BALOCHISTANBookmark this Case KHALIQ DAD VS State S. 9(c)---Possession of narcotics---Appreciation of evidence---Contradiction in statements of the prosecution witnesses---Effect---Prosecution case was that from the accused persons 2 kgs heroine and 25 kgs opium were recovered having been concealed in the cavities made in the dashboard of the car---Statement of Prosecution Witness (PW), constable, on the basis of whose report the FIR was registered, revealed that though he reiterated and remained firm to what he had recorded in the crime report, however, he did not mention about calling PW/Investigating Officer ('I.O') at the check post, but, while testifying before the Trial Court, he improvised his statement while stating that he informed him(I.O) whereafter he came to the check post and to whom he presented Murasila, whereas I.O/PW stated that while he was present in Levies Station Murasila was received by him, whereupon he registered the FIR and then went to the Check Post---Complainant and I.O both as PWs belied and contradicted each other on the receipt of Murasila and arrival at the crime scene, besides the fact that in the report and FIR nothing as stated was recorded---Prosecution had failed to prove the indictment and the reasoning assigned by the Trial Court was based on misreading of evidence as well as improper appraisal of evidence---Thus, High Court set aside the impugned judgment passed by the Trial Court and acquitted both the appellants from the charge, extending them the premium of benefit of doubt---Appeals against conviction were allowed, in circumstances.

Other judgments reported in 2024 PCRLJ

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