Case Details

Citation(s)
2011 SLG 2018 2011 SLD 2018 2011 YLR 62
Quetta High Court
Criminal Appeal No. 28 of 2008, decided on 29th September, 2010. DATE of hearing: 26th May, 2010
MRS. SYEDA TAHIRA SAFDAR AND GHULAM MUSTAFA MENGAL, JJ
Muhammad Aslam Chishti and Muhammad Mohsin Javed for Appellants. Sardar Ahmed Haleemi Special Prosecutor ATA for
Respondent

AURANGZEB

VS

THE STATE

Law:

Section:

West Pakistan Arms Ordinance (XX of 1965)--- ----S. 13(e)---Unlicensed possession of arms etc.---Appreciation of evidence---Benefit of doubt---Contradiction in statement of Police Officials as to alleged occurrence and recovery remained unexplained---Nothing on record showed recovery of alleged firearm from the possession of the accused---Investigating Officer did not conduct independent investigation but merely recorded the statements of witnesses of alleged seizure of ammunition and took into custody the carbon copy of recovery memo.---Neither the private witness was produced before the court nor his presence at place of occurrence was explained---Contradictions in prosecution case raised reasonable doubts---Trial Court failed to assess material and evidence on record---Mere custody of recovery memo. and statements of witnesses relating to another case were not sufficient for conviction---Prosecution having failed to establish the recovery of ammunition from possession of the accused, no question of production of licence or permit could arise---Conviction and sentence of the accused was set aside and he was acquitted of the charge. JUDGMENT MRS. SYEDA TAHIRA SAFDAR, J.---The appellant has preferred instant appeal feeling aggrieved of judgment dated 29-2-2008 of Special Judge, Anti-Terrorism Court-II, Quetta, whereby he has been found guilty for the offence under section 9 of Arms Ordinance, 1965, while convicted under section 13(e) of Arms Ordinance, 1965 to suffer rigorous imprisonment for a period of three years with fine of Rs.10,000, in default thereof further suffer imprisonment for six months. It is his contention that in absence of recovery of fire-arms from his possession the possible inference is that magazine/cartridges were planted on the appellant. Further, the trial Court made an error while referring to the record of other case, which was separately tried. He prayed for setting aside of the impugned judgment and his acquittal of the charge. As per record F.I.R. No.16 of 2007 Police Station Bostan District Pishin was lodged on report about recovery of one loaded magazine of Kalashnikov having 30 live cartridges from pocket of Shalwar wearing by…
🔒
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