Citation Name: 2024 YLR 309 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURTBookmark this Case AMIR MEHMOOD vs State S — 2024 YLR 309 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURT

Case information

Citation: 2024 YLR 309 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURT
Court: Peshawar High Court
Year: 2024
Reporter: YLR
Parties: Citation Name: 2024 YLR 309 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURTBookmark this Case AMIR MEHMOOD vs State S
Subject matter: Criminal
Provisions referred to: S. 302; S. 103---Q; S. 103; Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)

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 YLR 309 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURTBookmark this Case AMIR MEHMOOD VS State S. 302(b)---Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), S. 103---Qatl-i-amd---Appreciation of evidence---Benefit of doubt---Recovery of weapon of offence on the pointation of accused---Non-association of private witnesses during recovery proceedings---Consequential---Accused was charged for committing murder of the father-in-law of complainant by firing---Weapon of offence i.e. Kalashnikov had been recovered on the pointation of the accused from his house---Said weapon was sent to the Forensic Science Laboratory with previously recovered four crime empties of 7.62 bore and in that regard, the report showed that the crime empties were fired from the same local made 7.62 bore rifle (SMG)---However, the prosecution had not complied the requirements of S. 103, Cr.P.C., as the alleged Kalashnikov was recovered from the house of the accused, but no independent witness was associated with the process of recovery and even lady constable was not associated for such purpose in order to respect the sanctity of chaadar and chardewari; as such, the recovery of the weapon of offence so alleged and presented by the prosecution was prima facie tainted with doubts---Alleged recovered weapon of offence had not been substantiated to be registered with the quarter concerned in the name of the accused and no pain, whatsoever, had been taken to confirm the factum of its ownership, therefore, the possibility of planting the subject weapon on the accused could no way be ruled out---Appeal against conviction was allowed, in circumstances.

Other judgments reported in 2024 YLR

2024 YLR 2656 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDHMuhammad Maqsood VS State Ss. 324, 353 & 34---anti-Terrorism act (XXVII of 1997), S. 7---Sindh arms act (V of 2013), S. 23(1)(a)---attempt t…
2024 YLR 2635 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDHAbdul Karim VS State S. 497---Foreign Exchange Regulation Act (VII of 1947),Ss. 4, 5, 8 & 23---Payments through informal banking channel of…
2024 YLR 2619 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDHBijar alias Bijli VS State Ss. 324, 353, 225, 337-a(i), 337-F(i), 337-H(2), 147, 148 & 149---Sindh arms act (V of 2013), S. 24---anti-Terror…
2024 YLR 2586 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDHFayaz alias Fayaz Hussain VS State Ss. 302(b), 324, 353, 337-F(iii), 337-F(v), 337-H(2), 506(2), 148 & 149---anti-Terrorism act (XXVII of 19…
2024 YLR 2561 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDHMuhammad Bilal VS State S. 497---Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss. 409, 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 477-A & 109---Prevention of Corruption Act (II…
2024 YLR 1497 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDHKHALID VS State Minor contradictions in evidence---In consequential---Every contradiction can not take place of a material contradiction and…

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