Muhammad Arif vs State S — 2025 MLD 716 QUETTA-HIGH-COURT-BALOCHISTAN

Case information

Citation: 2025 MLD 716 QUETTA-HIGH-COURT-BALOCHISTAN
Court: Balochistan High Court
Year: 2025
Reporter: MLD
Parties: Muhammad Arif 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

Muhammad Arif VS State S. 9(c)---Possession of charas---Appreciation of evidence---Contradictions in the statements of witnesses---Prosecution case was that 10-kilogram charas in ten packets was recovered from the possession of accused---Seizing Officer testified that on 18.08.2023, while he was on patrol duty, he apprehended the appellant at about 07:30 p.m in the evening, carrying a commando colour shawl on his shoulder, and on searching him 10 packets of 'charas' wrapped in yellow tape, each weighing 1000 grams were found---From each packet 10 grams of 'charas' was extracted for analysis and parcels Nos.1 to 10 were prepared, whereas remaining 9900 grams of 'charas' was put in parcel No.11---Police Constable, who was member of the raiding party, was also recovery witness of the said parcels of narcotics, which were secured through recovery memos---Said witness produced parcels Nos.1 to 10 and samples of Forensic Science Laboratory contained therein---Said witness also produced parcel No.11, specimen of seal, contraband and shawl---Surprisingly, Moharar, who was in-charge malkhana, altogether contacted both of the said witnesses and testified that on 18.08.2023 at 10.30 p.m. at night, Investigating Officer came to the police station along with complainant and appellant from whom ten (10) kg of narcotics were recovered, whereof parcels were prepared, which were handed over to him, whereof he made entry in Register No.19 at serial No.260---Such contradictions had created doubt as it was hard to determine whether the said parcels were made on the spot or in the police station---Appeal against conviction was allowed, in circumstances.

Other judgments reported in 2025 MLD

2025 MLD 1208 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDHCitation Name: 2025 MLD 1208 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDHBookmark this Case Anwer Majid VS Emirates Bank International PJSC (formerly Union Bank…
2025 MLD 1426 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDHCitation Name: 2025 MLD 1426 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDHBookmark this Case Muhammad Sharif VS State Ss. 504, 506-B, 148, 149, 337-a(i) & 337-F(…
2025 MLD 1973 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHOREFahim Ahmed Saeed VS Mian Humayun Mahmud O.XXXIX, Rr.1, 2, O.XLIII, R.1(r) --- appeal against order of Trial Court refusing to grant ad-inte…
2025 MLD 1879 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORESumera Rasheed VS State S. 191---Perjury (false evidence)---Administration of justice---Duty of Courts---Perjury is a vice which stigmatizes…
2025 MLD 1879 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORESumera Rasheed VS State S. 191---False evidence---Necessary ingredients---Section 191, P.P.C talks about making of false statement in follow…
2025 MLD 1879 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORESumera Rasheed VS State S. 192---Fabricating false evidence---Necessary ingredients---Requirement of S.192 P.P.C. is met only if there is an…

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