Recovery on disclosure

Any recovery cannot be a discovery in terms of Art. 40 of Qanun-e-Shahadat, 1984 if place is already known to investigating officer and other recoveries were also taken into possession from that place.

Two accused faced trial and both of them were convicted by Trial Court but one was sentenced to death while the other was sentenced to imprisonment for life

Validity

Blood-stained 'Kassi' was allegedly recovered from deserted room situated in a place accessible to everyone

Prosecution failed to establish that deserted room was exclusively in possession of accused and no independent witness was cited from locality

Single instance causing reasonable doubt in the mind of Court entitled accused to benefit of doubt not as a matter of grace but as a matter of right

Prosecution failed to prove its case against accused beyond any shadow of doubt

High Court extending benefit of doubt to both the accused persons set aside their conviction and sentences awarded by Trial Court and acquitted them of the charge

Appeal was allowed in circumstances.

Accused were convicted by Trial Court and sentenced to various imprisonments extending to 14 years, which were ordered to run consecutively

Validity

FIR was got lodged within a short span of thirty minutes and complainant not only named all accused persons but had also mentioned each and every minor as well as material fact of incident therein, which excluded possibility of deliberation or consultation regarding false implication of accused

Prosecution successfully proved its case against accused persons who were caught red-handed and huge quantity of material to be used for preparation of explosives was recovered from them

No element of doubt was available in statements of prosecution witnesses which inspired confidence and nothing was found on record which could establish that witnesses deposed against accused persons and implicated them due to previous enmity, grudge or malice or to fulfil some ulterior motive

Ocular evidence was not only corroborated by recoveries effected on pointing out of accused persons at the time of their arrest but data retrieved from their laptop also strengthened claim of prosecution that accused were planning to do something extremely inhumane in the shape of terrorist attacks

High Court declined to interfere in conviction and sentence passed by Trial Court and maintained the same

High Court directed sentences to run concurrently instead of consecutively and the judgment of Trial Court was modified to that extent

Appeal was dismissed accordingly.