Citation Name: 2025 YLR 1071 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDHBookmark this Case ABDUL WALI ACHAKZAI vs State S — 2025 YLR 1071 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH

Case information

Citation: 2025 YLR 1071 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH
Court: Sindh High Court
Year: 2025
Reporter: YLR
Parties: Citation Name: 2025 YLR 1071 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDHBookmark this Case ABDUL WALI ACHAKZAI vs State S
Subject matter: Criminal
Provisions referred to: S. 9; S. 342

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: 2025 YLR 1071 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDHBookmark this Case ABDUL WALI ACHAKZAI VS State S. 9(c)--- Possession of narcotic substance---Appreciation of evidence---Safe custody of the recovered contraband not proved---Prosecution case was that accused were found transporting 330 kilograms charas concealed in the tank of a truck---Complainant testified at trial that after arrest and seizure, he brought the case property duly sealed to Customs Officer, showed the sample parcels to his superiors after de-sealing the same, whereafter those samples were separated as per their brands---Such fact alone was sufficient to draw an inference of tampering with the case property---Glance of record reflected that the case property was deposited by the Investigating Officer at chemical laboratory with a delay of two days---Neither the in-charge of warehouse was examined, nor Form 22.70 of Register No.XIX, required under Police Rules, 1934, was produced, to suggest its safe custody and safe transmission for chemical analysis--- Complainant further testified that the memo of arrest and seizure, being backbone of the case was authored by a clerk---Admittedly, said clerk too had not been examined---Record revealed that no incriminating evidence had been brought on the record against appellant AW, except mere allegation of being owner of truck; however, such fact had categorically been denied by him in his statement under S. 342, Cr.P.C.---Circumstances established that the prosecution had failed to prove its case against the appellants beyond any shadow of doubt---Appeal against conviction was allowed accordingly.

Other judgments reported in 2025 YLR

2025 YLR 1029 QUETTA-HIGH-COURT-BALOCHISTANAbdul Malik VS State S. 497---Bail order---Observations of Court---Scope---Observations made in a bail order are tentative in nature and sam…
2025 YLR 1778 SUPREME-COURT-AZAD-KASHMIRSarwat Bibi VS Muhammad Idrees Kiani Double presumption of innocence---Scope---after acquittal, an accused carries double presumption of inn…
2025 YLR 451 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHOREEjaz Ahmed VS State Benefit of doubt---Principle---If a single circumstance creates a reasonable doubt in the mind of a prudent person, then…
2025 YLR 487 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDHCitation Name: 2025 YLR 487 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDHBookmark this Case Nadir Hussain VS State Benefit of doubt---Principle---Single doubt in…
2025 YLR 443 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDHCitation Name: 2025 YLR 443 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDHBookmark this Case Qutubuddin Jakhrani VS State Minor contradictions---Scope---Where in…
2025 YLR 2329 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDHMrs. Rehana Khatoon VS M/s Delsol the School S.15---Eviction petition---Maintain-ability---Landlord being represented through attorney---Eff…

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