| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2020 SLG 1373 2020 SLD 1373 2020 YLR 1033 |
Federal Shariat Court
Criminal Appeal No. 141-Q of 1998, decision Dated: 19-12-2017, hearing Date : 14-12-2017.
SH. NAJAM UL HASAN, C.J. AND MEHMOOD MAQBOOL BAJWA, J
STATE through Deputy Attorney General for Pakistan Yahya Khan, Deputy Prosecutor General, Balochistan for Appellant. Shams-ud-Din Achakzai, Special Prosecutor for the ANF. Najam-ud-Din Mengal for
Respondents Nos.1 and 2.
Criminal Appeal No. 141-Q of 1998, decision Dated: 19-12-2017, hearing Date : 14-12-2017.
SH. NAJAM UL HASAN, C.J. AND MEHMOOD MAQBOOL BAJWA, J
STATE through Deputy Attorney General for Pakistan Yahya Khan, Deputy Prosecutor General, Balochistan for Appellant. Shams-ud-Din Achakzai, Special Prosecutor for the ANF. Najam-ud-Din Mengal for
Respondents Nos.1 and 2.
STATE THROUGH DEPUTY ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR PAKISTAN
VS
IBRAHIM AND ANOTHER
Law:
Section:
(a) Prohibition (Enforcement of Hadd) Order (4 of 1979)--- ----Arts. 3, 4 26---Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), S. 265-K---Prohibition of manufacture, etc of intoxicants, owning or possessing intoxicants---Prosecution appealed against the premature acquittal of respondents under S.265-K, Cr.P.C.---Only evidence available against the respondents was the statements of complainant and other witnesses, besides recovery memo through which charas was secured---Contents of the FIR as well as report under S. 173, Cr.P.C. revealed that the respondents were named in the FIR on source report i.e. information furnished by spy---Name and particulars of the informer was not disclosed---Implication of respondents on the basis of information furnished by secret sources, by itself was not sufficient to connect them with the offence---Nothing was available in the deposition of complainant which suggested that contraband material, seized from the spot, was owned by the respondents---Statements of witnesses other than complainant were ditto copy of the FIR---Federal Shariat Court held that implication of the respondents was a result of hearsay evidence and that no probability of their conviction existed---Appeal was dismissed. The State through Advocate-General, Sindh High Court of Karachi v. Raja Abdul Rehman 2005 SCMR 1544 rel. (b) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)--- ----S. 265-K---Object and scope of S.265-K, Cr.P.C.---Section 256-K, Cr.P.C. empowers the court to acquit an accused at any stage of the case if it considers that there is no probability of his conviction---Section 256-K, Cr.P.C. does not qualify the stage of exercise of powers in view of the expression "at any stage"---Only condition imposed is to provide "right of hearing" to the prosecutor and then reasons are required to be recorded to reach the conclusion---Purpose and object behind incorporation of S.265-K, Cr.P.C. is to prevent rigors of trial when it is apparent that there is no probability of conviction of the accused---Evidence available with the prosecution has to be examined, as it is, whether produced or yet to be recorded and while taking it as gospel truth, it has to be considered whether there…
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