Case Details

Citation(s)
2023 SLG 2246 2023 SLD 2246 2023 YLR 2579
Peshawar High Court, Mingora Bench
Criminal Appeal No. 276-M of 2022, decided on 27th February,2023.Date of hearing: 27th February, 2023.
Before Muhammad Naeem Anwar, J
Hamza Nawab for Appellant/convict. Raza Uddin Khan, A.A.G. for the State.

MEHBOOB ALI---Appellant

VERSUS

The STATE and another---Respondents

Law:

Section:

(a) Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Control of Narcotic Substances Act (XXXI of 2019)--- ----Ss. 9(d) & 11(c)---Possession of narcotics---Safe custody and safe transmission of the samples---Scope---Completeness of the chain of custody is of utmost importance and any break therein or lapse in the control of possession of the samples would be sufficient to create a doubt regarding safe custody and safe transmission of the samples---In such eventualities, reliability of the positive Forensic Science Laboratory Report qua the samples lost its value and could not be relied upon for conviction of accused. The State through Regional Director ANF v. Imam Bakhsh and others 2018 SCMR 2039 rel. (b) Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Control of Narcotic Substances Act (XXXI of 2019)--- ----Ss. 9(d) & 11(c)--- Possession of narcotics---Appreciation of evidence---Benefit of doubt---Safe custody of the recovered substances not established---Prosecution case was that 750 grams ICE was recovered from the possession of one accused, 783 grams ICE was recovered from the possession of other accused and 8231 grams charas in eight packets was recovered from their vehicle---Record showed that none of the prosecution witnesses had explained in their examination-in-chief that who had brought the samples to police station and when, and to whom the same were handed over for safe custody---Record showed that ASI/witness had taken only Murasila, card of arrest and recovery memo to police station but his statement was silent regarding the case property rather other ASI/witness, to whom the said documents were handed over by the police witness, admitted that along with Murasila neither case property nor the accused had been produced before him---Constable, who was carrier of the samples to Forensic Science Laboratory, in response to a question in his cross-examination, stated that the parcels were lying with Moharrir in his office---Moharrir recorded his statement only to the extent of handing over the samples to constable and did not utter a single word in his examination-in-chief that the samples had been given to him by Seizing Officer for safe custody---Said witness stated in his cross-examination that he had…
🔒
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