Case Details

Citation(s)
2021 SLG 2751 2021 SLD 2751 2021 MLD 1924
Federal Shariat Court
Criminal Appeal No.01-K of 2019, decided on 30th September, 2019, Date of hearing: 30th September, 2019.
SYED MUHAMMAD FAROOQ SHAH, JUSTICE
Muhammad Naeem Memon for Appellants. Zafar Ahmed Khan, Additional Prosecutor General Sindh for the State.

KATHOOR AND ANOTHERS

VS

THE STATE

Law: Prohibition (Enforcement of Hadd) Order, 1979

Section: 3,4,22

Law: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)

Section: 103

Law: Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984)

Section: 133

(a) Prohibition (Enforcement of Hadd) Order (4 of 1979)--- ----Arts.3, 4 22---Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), S.103---Recovery of liquor---Appreciation of evidence---Benefit of doubt---Non-association of public witness---Issuance of search warrant---Scope---Prosecution case was that a drum containing 50 liters of liquor was recovered from the possession of accused---Record showed that despite having advance information of the occurrence, the police raiding party did not accompany any independent person of the locality, situated in a thickly populated area---For search of a family dwelling, neither they accompanied any lady police constable nor associated neighbourer of the locality, in violation of S.103, Cr.P.C.---Police also did not obtain any search warrant of dwelling in contravention of Art.22 of Prohibition (Enforcement of Hadd) Order, 1979---Provisions of S.103, Cr.P.C., were restricted to searches under Chap. VII of Cr.P.C applied to all recoveries made by the Police Officers, more particularly, search of dwellings---Accused persons had not been confronted to the Chemical Examiners Report, thus Chemical Examiners Report was ruled out of the consideration---Non-association of the inhabitants of the vicinity during search of a dwelling, particularly when there was advance information, besides alleged bitter acrimonious relations of accused persons with Nekmard of the locality, who was cast-fellow of the complainant, casted doubt on genuineness of charge sheet---Circumstances established that the prosecution had miserably failed to prove its case against the accused beyond shadow of reasonable doubt---Appeal against conviction was allowed, in circumstances. 1997 SCMR 1494; 2002 PCr.LJ 799; 2600 PCr.LJ 1812; 1997 PCr.LJ. 826; Tariq Pervaiz v. The State 1995 SCMR 1345; Muhammad Akram v. The State 2009 SCMR 230; Faryad Ali v. The State 2008 SCMR 1086; Yasin Ali alias Ghulam Mustafa v. The State 2008 SCMR 336; Muhammad Razakue v. The State 2008 PCr.LJ 149; Muhammad Shah v. The State 2010 SCMR 1009; Sher Dil v. The State 1999 SCMR 697; Qaddan and others v. The State 2017 SCMR 148; Abdul Rashid v. State PLD 1975 Kar. 92; Ballia and others v. State 1985 SCMR…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register

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