| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2016 SLG 3793 2016 SLD 3793 2016 YLR 1674 |
Shariat Court (AJ&K)
Criminal Appeal No. 60 and Criminal Reference No. 61 of 2014, decided on 22nd December, 2015.
SARDAR ABDUL HAMEED KHAN, JUSTICE
Khawaja Attaullah Chak for Appellant. Muhammad Tariq Alam, A.A.G. for the State.
Criminal Appeal No. 60 and Criminal Reference No. 61 of 2014, decided on 22nd December, 2015.
SARDAR ABDUL HAMEED KHAN, JUSTICE
Khawaja Attaullah Chak for Appellant. Muhammad Tariq Alam, A.A.G. for the State.
ABDUL HAFEEZ KHAN-
VS
. THE STATE THROUGH ADVOCATE GENERAL AJ&K
Law:
Section:
Azad Jammu and Kashmir Prohibition (Enforcement of Hadd) Act, 1985----- -----Ss. 3 & 4-----Pakistan Arms Ordinance (XX of 1965), S.13-----Manufacturing, owning or possessing intoxicant; possessing unlicensed arms-----Appreciation of evidence-----Neither the allegation was levelled in FIR/challan, nor any proof of import, export, transfer, manufacturing or processing of any intoxicant; or bottles of any intoxicant; or sale or serve any intoxicant was established on record; which could affirm that accused committed any crime falling under S.3 of Azad Jammu and Kashmir Prohibition (Enforcement of Hadd) Act, 1985-----Record further revealed that only the intoxicant and other material was found and recovered from his possession-----Only S.4 of the Azad Jammu and Kashmir Prohibition (Enforcement of Hadd) Act, 1985, was attracted in his case, through which accused had been awarded sentence by the court below-----Raid was conducted early in the morning at 5:15 a.m. in winter and at that time it was hard to associate the private person in recovery process-----Mere fact that the recovery of incriminating material was effected from accused in presence of Police witnesses, was no ground for disbelieving such a recovery, particularly so when the presence of any independent witness at the place of recovery, had not been even suggested to the prosecution witnesses by the defence-----No enmity of the prosecution witnesses had been brought on record by the defence-----Accused had failed to bring on record any evidence to prove his plea of false implication on account of enmity-----Conviction order concurrently passed by both the courts below, did not warrant any interference by the Shariat Court-----By reducing the sentence, as well as running the sentence concurrently, first Appellate Court had met ends of justice in a legal fashion; which merited no further reduction in sentences passed by first Appellate Court-----Sentence passed under S.3 of Azad Jammu and Kashmir Prohibition (Enforcement of Hadd) Order, 1985, was set aside whereas conviction and sentence passed under S.4 of said Act, were upheld, with the benefit of S.382-B, Cr.P.C. 2004 PCr.LJ 890; 1998 PCr.LJ 1293…
Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492