FARMAN ALI vs State S — 2025 SCMR 1730 SUPREME-COURT

Fields are extracted from the reported citation and judgment text. Where a detail is not stated in the record, it is not shown.

FARMAN ALI VS State S. 9(c)---Possession of narcotic substance---Re-appraisal of evidence---Safe custody and safe transmission of the recovered substance to the laboratory not proved---Chain of custody of contraband doubtful---Prosecution case was that 20-kilogram charas was recovered from the vehicle driven by the accused---Complainant stated that after completing the recovery proceedings, he took both the appellants, contraband, along with parcels and the vehicle to the police station and handed over the same to Moharrar---Said Moharrar stated that complainant handed over to him sample parcels total 1640 in number and 5/5 grams charas (samples) for onward transmission to the office of Forensic Science Laboratory and 82 sacks of case property for safe custody in the Mallkhana of the police station---Said witness also stated that he sent 1640 parcels weighing 5 grams each to the Forensic Science Laboratory along with application to Forensic Science Laboratory for analysis through Police Constable---However, the said Police Constable through whom 1640 samples of the contraband material were sent to the Forensic Science Laboratory had not been produced in the witness box by the prosecution---No valid reason had been given before the Trial Court for non-production of the said witness in the witness box---Name of the said Police Constable had also not been mentioned in the calendar of witnesses in report under Section 173,Cr.P.C.---Report of Forensic Science Laboratory depicted that the name of the person who deposited the sample parcels in the said office had not been mentioned therein and only No. 5915 had been mentioned---Head Constable, while appearing in the witness box before the trial Court, stated that he took Murasila, the recovery memo, the card of arrest, application for Forensic Science Laboratory along with parcels to the police station and handed over the same to Police Officer/ASI---However, upon perusal of the deposition of Police Officer/ASI, said witness did not make any mention of receipt of the said parcels of charasand only mentioned receipt of the Murasila sent by complainant---However, as per the deposition of complainant, the said samples were handed over to Moharrar for onward transmission to the Forensic Science Laboratory---Such ambiguity as to who was handed over the samples parcels of the charas raised serious doubts regarding the chain of custody of the contraband material by the prosecution and the genuineness of the prosecution story, the benefit of which ambiguities and doubts was to be extended to the appellants as a matter of right---Circumstances established that the prosecution had failed to prove its case against the appellants beyond the shadow of doubt---Appeal against conviction was allowed, in circumstances.

FARMAN ALI vs State S — 2025 SCMR 1730 SUPREME-COURT

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2025 SCMR