Law: Penal Code (XLV of 1860)

Section: 399 , 402

P L D 1995 Karachi 105 Criminal Appeals Nos.D-93, 113, 114 and 117 of 1994, decided on 11th December, 1994. Penal Code (XLV of 1860)--- , ----Ss. 399 & 402---West Pakistan Arms Ordinance (XX of 1965), S.13-- Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), S.154--- Appreciation of evidence -- Whole police proceedings appeared to have been prepared at the police station--- No evidence was available on record to suggest that the accused either had assembled for the purpose of committing  dacoity  or  were  making  any  preparation  for  committing dacoity---Statements claimed to have been recorded by the Police at the spot at the time of apprehension of accused under S.154, Cr.P.C. appeared to be doubtful---Statements of the accused under S.342, Cr.P.C. had not been recorded by Trial Court---Accused were acquitted in circumstances. [pp. 110, 111, 112] A, B, E, F, H & I Sirajul Haque and others v. The State 1994 PCr.LJ 685; Amir Ali Khan v. The State 1994 PCr.LJ 576; Muhammad Sohail v. The State PLD 1994 Lah. 383; Mishal Khan v. The State 1983 PCr.LJ 1628 and Ghazi and 2 others v. The State PLJ 1978 Cr. C. (Quetta) 557 ref. Penal Code (XLV of 1860)--- ----S. 402---Mere assembly of five or more armed persons at one place does not give rise to any presumption that they had assembled there to commit dacoity. [p. 111] C . Sirajul Haque and others v. The State 1994 PCr.LJ 685; Amir Ali Khan v. The State 1994 PCr.IJ 576 and Muhammaa Sohail v. The State PLD 1994 Lah. 383 ref. Suppression of Terrorist Activities (Special Courts) Act (XV of 1975)--- ----S. 8---Burden of proof---Burden under S.8 initially lies on the prosecution and after discharge of the same by the prosecution it shifts to the accused.-- [Burden of proof]. [p. 111]   Mishal Khan v. The State 1983 PCr.LJ 1628 and Ghazi and 2 others v. The State PLJ 1978 Cr. C. (Quetta) 557 ref. Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)--- ----S. 342 & 340(2)---Examination of accused, failure of---Statement of accused recorded on oath under S.340(2), Cr.P.C. cannot be equated with the statement required to be recorded under S.342, Cr.P.C. [p. 111] G Dates of hearing: 12th and 13th…