PAK LAW GPT — Pakistan Case Law AI justice scale emblemPAK LAW GPTCase law · Urdu & English

Feroz Khan vs State S — 2025 YLR 2368 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURT

Case information

Citation
2025 YLR 2368 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURT
Court
Peshawar High Court
Year
2025
Reporter
YLR
Parties
Feroz Khan vs State S
Subject matter
Criminal
Provisions referred to
S. 516-; Penal Code (XLV of 1860)

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

Feroz Khan VS State S. 516-a---Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss. 392 & 34---Superdari of seized cash amount---Scope---Complainant lodged a report against unknown culprits for robbing him of his motorcar, cash amount of Rs. 26,00,000/- and a smart phone---Later on, complainant nominated three accused---accused were arrested and on their pointation, an amount of Rs. 5,00,000/- was recovered---Complainant/ petitioner submitted an application to the Judicial Magistrate for the return of recovered amount, however his application was dismissed, which order was upheld by the Revisional Court---Validity---Petitioner/ complainant had specifically mentioned in the FIR that he was robbed of his money---Record confirmed that the recovery was made on the pointation of the accused---In such circumstances, the observations of the Courts below that the petitioner/ complainant was not the last possessor were without basis/ unfounded---Petitioner/complainant was robbed of the cash amount, which he had freshly withdrawn from the bank---Understandable that the complainant could not recall the details of each banknote, especially when the amount involved was a substantial sum of Rs.26,00,000/----Therefore, even if an identification parade had been conducted, it would not have served any useful purpose insofar as the plea of the petitioner for interim custody of the recovered money was concerned---Be that as it may, the petitioner was the complainant in the instant case, and as per the record, the recovered amount was shown to be part of the robbed money---Guilt of the accused on the basis of the recovery was yet to be adjudged at the trial---Petitioner/ complainant had succeeded in tentatively establishing his entitlement to the interim custody of the recovered amount---Petition was allowed, accordingly.

Other judgments reported in 2025 YLR

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