Citation Name: 2024 PCrLJ 678 QUETTA-HIGH-COURT-BALOCHISTANBookmark this Case KHALIQ DAD vs State Ss — 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 Ss
Subject matter: Criminal
Provisions referred to: Narcotic Substances Act

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 Ss. 9(c) & 36---Control of Narcotic Substances (Government Analysts) Rules, 2001, Rr. 4, 5 & 6---Possession of narcotics---Appreciation of evidence---Transmission/dispatch of sample for test or analysis---Safe custody and transmission of samples not established---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---Investigation Officer (I.O) as a Prosecution Witness (PW) in his examination-in-chief did not mention a word regarding the parcels of heroine and opium, including samples given to the In-charge Malkhana (PW) and receiving back from him and handing over to constable (PW) for onward transmission for chemical analysis to Forensic Science Lab---Prosecution had failed to prove the safe custody and transmission of samples---Protocols provided under section 36 of the Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997 and Rr. 5 & 6 of the Control of Narcotic Substances (Government Analysts) Rules, 2001, had not been complied with---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 of the charge, extending them the premium of benefit of doubt---Appeals against conviction were allowed, in circumstances.

Other judgments reported in 2024 PCRLJ

2024 PCrLJ 1098 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORESheraz Ahmad VS State Ss. 295-A, 295-B, 295-C, 298-C, 109 & 34---prevention ofelectronic Crimes Act (XL of 2016), S. 11---Application of the…
2024 PCrLJ 1610 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDHMuzamil VS State Sched. I, Entries Nos. 3 & 4---Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss. 376(2), 506-B & 34---Anti-Terrorism Act (XXVII of 1997), S. 7-…
2024 PCrLJ 1462 ISLAMABADMuhammad Haseeb VS State S. 497---prevention of electronic Crimes Act (XL of 2016), Ss. 21 & 24---Offences against modesty of a natural pers…
2024 PCrLJ 1462 ISLAMABADMuhammad Haseeb VS State S. 497---prevention of electronic Crimes Act (XL of 2016),Ss. 21 & 24---Offences against modesty of a natural perso…
2024 PCrLJ 1521 QUETTA-HIGH-COURT-BALOCHISTANCitation Name: 2024 PCrLJ 1521 QUETTA-HIGH-COURT-BALOCHISTANBookmark this Case Abdul Hadi alias Babul VS State S. 497---Penal Code (XLV of 1…
2024 PCrLJ 993 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURTFazal nawaz alias muhammad shafi VS State S. 302(b)---Qatl-i-amd---Appreciation of evidence---Benefit of doubt---Abscondence of the accused-…

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