Citation Name: 2025 YLR 487 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDHBookmark this Case Nadir Hussain vs State S

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

Citation Name: 2025 YLR 487 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDHBookmark this Case Nadir Hussain VS State S.9(d)---Possession and transportation of narcotic substance---Appreciation of evidence---Safe custody and safe transmission of recovered substance to laboratory doubtful---Scope---Prosecution case was that 21000-grams Bhang was recovered from the possession of the accused---Chain of custody remained shrouded in mystery as nothing was brought on record to show why the parcel was kept in malkhana for 04 (four) days prior to being sent to the Chemical Examiner, and even the official who claimed to have taken the parcel to the office of the Chemical Examiner was not examined as witness---For the Chemical Examiner's Report to have real probative value, the sanctity of the chain of custody is absolutely imperative---It is prosecution's responsibility that such chain of custody must be safe and secure because the report of the Chemical Examiner carries critical importance under the Act, 1997, and the proof of chain of custody can only ensure the reaching of recovered material to the office of the Chemical Examiner---Investigating Officer dispatched the parcel to the laboratory through Police Constable, who in his examination-in-chief had not uttered a single word that Investigating Officer delivered the parcel to him on 24.10.2022 and he delivered the same to the Chemical Examiner---Thus, the prosecution admittedly failed to adduce evidence of dispatcher in order to corroborate the chain of custody of case property as unbroken, for which prosecution was liable to prove the safe custody and transmission of sealed sample parcel to the Chemical Examiner---Investigating Officer also failed to explain the delay of four (04) days for keeping the parcel with malkhana, therefore, the elements of tampering with the parcels could not be ruled out and due to such defect on the part of prosecution, it could not be held with any degree of certainty that the prosecution had succeeded in establishing its case against the accused beyond any reasonable doubt---Appeal against conviction was allowed, in circumstances.

Citation Name: 2025 YLR 487 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDHBookmark this Case Nadir Hussain vs State S — 2025 YLR 487 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2025 YLR