1976 P Cr (PLP)
THE STATE‑Petitioner Versus MUHAMMAD ASGHAR‑Convict‑Respondent
| Citation | 1976 P Cr (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | Abdul Ghafoor Khan Lodhi, |
| Parties | THE STATE‑Petitioner Versus MUHAMMAD ASGHAR‑Convict‑Respondent |
| Primary Law | West Pakistan Arms Ordinance (XX of 1965)‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1976 P Cr (PLP)?
This judgment primarily cites: West Pakistan Arms Ordinance (XX of 1965)‑ as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1976 P Cr (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Abdul Ghafoor Khan Lodhi,.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1976 P Cr (PLP) (THE STATE‑Petitioner Versus MUHAMMAD ASGHAR‑Convict‑Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Headnotes / Summary
‑‑ S. 13‑Recovery‑Gun and cartridges belonging to another bona fide licensee, produced by accused during investigation of murder case on asking of Police‑Possession of accused, held, not with any criminal intention‑Conviction and sentence, set a side, in circumstances.‑[Recovery].
Judgment & Decree
West Pakistan Arms Ordinance (XX of 1965)‑
‑‑ S. 13‑Recovery‑Gun and cartridges belonging to another bona fide licensee, produced by accused during investigation of murder case on asking of Police‑Possession of accused, held, not with any criminal intention‑Conviction and sentence, set a side, in circumstances.‑[Recovery]. This appeal arises from the judgment dated 18‑1‑1975 recorded by the learned Session, Judge, Sheikhupura, whereby he convicted the respondent under section 13 of the Arms Ordinance, 1965 and sentenced him to one year R. I. The facts of the case from which the arms case arose were that the respondent along with five others armed with gun Exh. P. I went to the house left by Fazal Din and fired the gun at the complainant party of that case but it did not hit any body. During the investigation of the said murder case the appellant seas arrested on 17‑6‑72 and on the asking of the police he produced the gun alongwith three live cartridges. The gun belongs to one Munir whose licence was also recovered by the police.
3. In the murder case the prosecution failed to prove that Asghar respondent was correctly identified and that it was be who fired the gun. It was also not proved Mat the gun P. 7 was in the possession of the respondent at the time of the occurrence. So, there is no evidence that the respondent was holding gun P. 1 at the time of the occurrence or that he participated in the occurrence.
4. So far as the recovery of the gun from the possession of the respondent is concerned, the evidence is not that his house was searched or that at some other place he was found to be in possession of the gun. Rather the prosecution case is that during the investigation of the murder case the respondent on the asking of the police brought the gun and the cartridges. So tie held the gun and the cartridges without licence because he was asked by the police to bring them. If the police bad not directed him he would not have kept in his possession the gun and the cartridges and produced them before the police. He, therefore, did not keep the gun and the cartridges in his possession with any criminal inten tion rather was compelled to bring the same. In view of the observations made above, I accept the appeal and setting aside the conviction and the sentence acquit the respondent. He shall be released immediately if required in any other case. Appeal accepted.