1994 P Cr (PLP)
SALEEM — Appellant Versus THE STATE — Respondent
| Citation | 1994 P Cr (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Karachi |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | SALEEM — Appellant Versus THE STATE — Respondent |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1994 P Cr (PLP)?
This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1994 P Cr (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the Karachi bench comprising: N/A.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1994 P Cr (PLP) (SALEEM — Appellant Versus THE STATE — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Headnotes / Summary
S. 13-D
Recovery was not made from the person of the accused
Prosecution evidence was materially contradictory and did not inspire confidence
Contention on behalf of prosecution that under S.8 of Suppression of Terrorist Activities. (Special Courts) Act, 1975, burden of proof was upon the accused had no force as the prosecution had failed to prove possession or control of the accused over the Klashnikov and the ammunition allegedly recovered at his instance
Accused was acquitted in circumstances.
Judgment & Decree
HAZIQUL KHAIRI, J: -- The appellant Saleem was convicted and sentenced to undergo R.I. for four years under section 13-D, Arms Ordinance by (S.TA.) Special Court III Karachi. As per the F.I.R. lodged by one Muhammad Ghous S.H.O. of Police Station Korangi while he was patrolling in "K" Area Korangi on 12-7-1992 at about 1-00 a.m. he found the appellant Saleem at bushes by the side of K.T.C. bus-stop. The said accused ran away after seeing the police party, which chased him and ultimately caught hold of him. After interrogation, the appellant took the police party to a place near bushes and recovered from there a Klash9ikov with a rounds and magazine which were wrapped in a old cloth. Similar statement is found in the Mashirnama Exh.4. Since the appellant could not produce any licence for the Klashnikov, a case against him was registered under section 13-D of the Arms Ordinance. Similarly P.W.1 Manzoor Baig who is also a Mashir and is a police constable had deposed in examination-in-chief that on the pomtation of the appellant the police recovered unlicensed arms and ammunition from the bushes which were not buried in the ground. As against this the said S.H.O. Raja Ghous Muhammad P.W.3 complainant when cross-examined took a somersault and contradicted himself stating that a police constable with him dug the ground in his presence from where the said unlicensed Klashnikov and other ammunition were recovered from the bushes. He also admitted that "K" Area is the busiest market in Korangi and has the only Bus-stop there but he could not find any private witness. The evidence on record is not satisfy enough to convict the appellant. The recovery was not made from the person of the appellant. There are material contradictions in the deposition of prosecution witnesses. The evidence of the prosecution does not inspire. confidence. The plea of learned counsel for the State that under section 8 of the S.TA. the burden of proof is upon the accused is not applicable in this case as the prosecution has failed to prove possession or control of the Klashnikov and the 8 rounds of ammunition with the appellant. In the circumstances we allow the appeal. The appellant may be released if not required any other criminal case. N.H.Q./S-1020/K Appeal allowed.