Case Details

Citation(s)
1997 SLG 708 1997 SLD 708 1997 SCMR 1011
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Criminal Appeal No. 15(S) of 1995, decision dated: 13-03-1997
FAZAL RAHI KHAN AND PIR MUHAMMAD KARAM SHAH, JJ

Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395

MUHAMMAD MUMTAZ

VS

THE STATE

Law:

Section:

(a) Prohibition (Enforcement of Hadd) Order (4 of 1979)--Art. 4---Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art.203F(2B)---Contentions were that the quantity of one gram of heroin sent to Chemical Examiner for analysis being grossly inadequate could not possibly be helping in forming expert opinion which ought to have been exhaustive and self-contained and the Chemical Examiner's Report which did not appear to have been signed was produced on record for the first time at the time of examination of accused under S.342, Cr.P.C: without having given any opportunity to him to explain the allegation against him---Leave to appeal was granted to accused to consider the said contentions. Din Muhammad v. The Crown 1969 SCMR 777 and Sultan Khan v. Sher Khan and others PLD 1991 SC 520 ref. (b) Prohibition (Enforcement of Hadd) Order (4 of 1979)--- ----Art. 4---Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art.203F(2B)---Appreciation of evidence---Accused when examined under 5.342, Cr.P.C. was not put the Chemical Examiner's report in violation of the mandatory provision of law which having been placed on record for the first time in the statement of the Prosecutor while closing the prosecution case had deprived the accused of an opportunity to cross-examine the witness in the light of the said report--­Generally in such-like cases on having found an illegality or material irregularity in the trial of accused remand of the case was not resorted to, but huge quantity of heroin weighing 2100 grams allegedly having been recovered from the accused in the instant case and offence being an heinous one, his acquittal could defeat the ends of justice---Conviction and sentence of accused were consequently set aside and the case was remanded to Trial Court for de novo trial and decision on merits. Din Muhammad v. The Crown 1969 SCMR 777 rel. Sultan Khan v. Sher Khan and others PLD 1991 SC 520 ref. Raja Muhammad Ibrahim Satti, Advocate Supreme Court and Ch. Akhtar Ali, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioner. Jan Aziz Sandhi, Advocate Supreme Court for the State. Date of hearing: 13th March, 1997. ORDER FAZAL ILAHI KHAN, J.---In this appeal while seeking leave to appeal the learned counsel for the appellant 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