Muhammad Zubair vs State S — 2025 YLR 1963 ISLAMABAD

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

Muhammad Zubair VS State S. 120-B---Explosive Substances Act (VI of 1908), Ss. 4 & 5---Pakistan Arms Ordinance (XX of 1965), S. 13---Anti-Terrorism Act (XXVII of 1997), S. 7---Criminal conspiracy, recovery of explosive material, possession of illicit weapon, act of terrorism---Appreciation of evidence---Benefit of doubt---Recovery not proved---Accused were found in possession of a plastic bag containing 910 grams explosive substance, 10 detonators, prima card wire 05 meters, .30 bore two pistols with 19-live bullets---Two recovery witnesses appeared before the trial Court---From the statements of recovery witnesses, a particular bag of cloth in the right hand of appellant"D" was highlighted, the plastic envelope in which explosive substance was wrapped, the white paper in which detonator was wrapped, string of Shalwar and Shalwar from where pistol and magazines were recovered and at last piece of paper with phrase Tahreek-e-Labaik were coming, but astonishingly these recoveries had not been exhibited in the Trial Court which were the key evidence to conclude the entire chain of evidence against the appellant "D"---Similarly, recovery witness in his affirmative evidence referred a "bag" in the right hand of the appellant "MZ", black shawl (chadar), plastic envelope, detonators wrapped in white paper and string of Shalwar as well as right armpit pocket of the accused---All those incriminating materials carrying explosive as alleged by the prosecution as well as pistol and live bullets were missing in the case, neither the same were produced in the Court nor any recovery memo. was prepared by the Investigation Officer of the case to that extent---In all kind of recoveries in any criminal case whether of narcotics or of explosive substance the police authorities are under obligation to discharge their duties in terms of Police Rules, 1934, dealing with case property---In the present case, recovery witnesses as well as Investigating Officer were not able to demonstrate as to why the bag from where explosive substance was recovered from both the appellants, the cloth, shawl, white paper and plastic bag were not produced to complete the chain of evidence---In absence of those crucial part of evidence when the same were not produced or exhibited in the trial, same could not be considered proven and conviction could not be made---Appeal against conviction was allowed, in circumstances.

Muhammad Zubair vs State S — 2025 YLR 1963 ISLAMABAD

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2025 YLR