CRIME WEAPON/EMPTIES
1 : Bails 2 : Appreciation of Evidence
1: Bails
1991 PCrLJ 106 (Note 145) Noor Samand V/S The State (Lahore).
S.302/109/149. Neither any injury nor any motive was available against accused nor any crime empties of alleged firing was recovered from the place of occurrence. BAIL GRANTED
1991 PCrLJ 176 (Note) Arshad & Others V/S The State.
S..302/307/148/149 PPC. Accused was ascribed only general firing and no injury was attributed to him. No crime empty was recovered. BAIL GRANTED
1992 PCrLJ 559. Muhammad Afzal V/S The State (Lahore).
S.302/34 PPC. Accused was alleged to have fired 6/7 shots, yet not a single crime empty was secured. BAIL GRANTED
1992 PCrLJ 1679 Sanaullah V/S The State (Lahore).
S.302/307/148/149 PPC. No crime empty was recovered from spot nor from chamber of revolver recovered from accused. BAIL GRANTED
1995 PCrLJ 1942. Atta Hussain V/S The State (Lahore).
S.302 PPC. Recovery of Dopatta with which accused allegedly strangulated his daughter, was not very much material as same was not stained with blood and even otherwise such articles were easily available in every home. BAIL GRANTED
1996 PCrLJ 227. Muhammad Suleman V/S The State (Karachi DB).
S.324/148/149 PPC. None of accused persons was stated in the FIR to have been armed with a rifle but according to recovery memo 38 rifle empties, 150 Klashinkov empties and 95 gun empties had been secured from the place of occurrence and despite such a heavy firing no body from the complainant side was injured. BAIL GRANTED
1997 MLD 1146. The State V/S Hadan & another (Chief Court Gilgit).
S.302/34 PPC. Weapon of offence allegedly recovered from the accused and the crime empties secured in the case had not been sent to Arms Expert for matching. Court below, in circumstances, had rightly exercised its discretion by enlarging the accused on bail. BAIL NOT CANCELLED
NLR 2004 CrLJ 910. Muhammad Bashir etc. V/S The State (Lahore)
S.302/109/148/149 PPC. Mere non-recovery of weapon of offence is no ground to grant bail to accused in a murder case when there is no reason for his false implication. BAIL REFUSED.
PLJ 2008 Cr.C.(Lahore) 983. Azhar V/S The State
S.302/34 PPC. Recovery of rifle. Held: In absence of any empty from the place of occurrence the recovery of rifle did not possess any corroborative value because without matching the empty with the rifle it cannot be presumed with any degree of certainty that the recovered rifle was the one which had been used in the occurrence. Case of further inquiry. BAIL GRANTED
2: Appreciation of Evidence
NLR 1991 CrLJ 314. Muhammad Hanif etc. V/S The State (Lahore).
S.302/34 PPC. Recovery of blood-stained churris nine days after occurrence from place accessible to every member of family, held, in absence of any independent witness, recovery did not inspire confidence and merited exclusion from consideration. ACQUITTAL
NLR 1991 CrLJ 720 Muhammad Sharif Khan V/S The State (SC AJK).
S.302 PPC. Delay in sending crime empties to expert is usually seen with doubt. Held, recovery of empties was not reliable as delay in sending the same for examination of expert did suggest tampering. ACQUITTAL
PLD 1992 SC 570. Muhammad Tahseen V/S Saleem Akhtar & others.
S.302 PPC. Previous statement of the eye-witnesses recorded U/S 161 CrPC indicates that they were not sure about the weapon of offence. Eye-witness account, held, stood negated in circumstances and High Court was fully justified in not relying on the eye-witnesses account of solitary evidence. APPEAL AGAINST ACQUITTAL DISMISSED.
NLR 1994 CrLJ 78. Nazir Ahmed V/S The State (Lahore).
S.302 PPC. Recovery of gun would not be of any help to prosecution when no empty was recovered from spot. ACQUITTAL
NLR 1994 CrLJ 160. Muhammad Asghar V/S The State (Lahore).
S.302 PPC. Mere fact that knife recovered at the instance of accused was not stained with blood, would be no ground to discard evidence of recovery. APPEAL DISMISSED
NLR 1994 CrLJ 325. Abdul Jabbar V/S The State (Lahore DB).
S.302 PPC. Evidentory value of recoveries. Recovery of crime empties, their despatch to Forensic Science Laboratory and then wedding with pistol recovered at instance of accused, cannot be relied upon when other evidence on record has thrown sufficient dust on veracity of recovery evidence. ACQUITTAL
1994 PCrLJ 566. Imran Choudhry V/S The State (Lahore).
S.302 PPC. Recovery of gun at the instance of accused had no evidentary value. No independent corroboration was brought on record to prove guilt of the accused. ACQUITTAL
1994 SCMR 1928. Muhammad Iqbal V/S The State.
S.302/149 PPC. Where no empty was recovered from the spot, the recoveries of fire arm from the accused were of no consequence.
1995 MLD 379 Sajjan & 2 Others V/S The State (Karachi DB).
S.302/114/34 PPC. Recovery of empty cartridges did not connect the accused with the crime. APPEAL ACCEPTED
KLR 1995 CrC 46. Jamal Nasir V/S The State (Lahore).
S.302 PPC. Effecting recovery of incriminating danda when it was lying open in the room after lapse of many days by the police seemed absurd. Hence not believable. APPEAL ACCEPTED
NLR 1995 CrLJ 483. Khizar Ali V/S The State (Lahore DB).
S.302 PPC. Recovery of gun would be of no help to prosecution when no empty was recovered from scene of occurrence. ACQUITTAL
NLR 1995 CrLJ 783. Muhammad Ashraf @ Kalia V/S The State (Bahawalpur).
S.302 PPC. Crime empties not mentioned in FIR and Zimnis would not be free from doubt. ACQUITTAL
1995 PCrLJ 48. Fateh Sher & Others V/S The State (Lahore DB).
S.302/307/148/149 PPC. Recovery of fire arms was not of any consequence as no empties had been found. ACQUITTAL
PLD 1995 Lahore 440 Abdul Wahad & Others V/S The State (DB).
S.302/34 PPC. No crime empty having been recovered from the spot, recovery of gun from accused was of no help to prosecution. ACQUITTAL
1995 SCMR 896. Zafar Hayat V/S The State.
S.302 PPC. Recovery of gun could not be relied upon, same having not been sent for examination of the Fire Arm Expert. APPEAL ALLOWED
1995 SCMR 1730 Riaz Masih @ Mithoo V/S The State (DB).
S.302 PPC. Ocular evidence having been excluded from consideration, the only recovery of blood-stained knife from the accused by itself was not sufficient for his conviction on murder charge, which even otherwise appeared to be doubtful. ACQUITTAL
PLD 1996 Quetta (DB). 40 Abdul Jabbar V/S The State.
S.302 PPC. Accused in his statement U/S 342 CrPC admitted recovery of crime weapon at his instance. Accused having himself led the police to a particular place for recovery of the crime weapon, two independent and respectable inhabitants of the locality to witness the recovery proceedings were not required.
1997 MLD 1322. Abdul Rehman @ Bakhu & another V/S The State (Lahore).
S.302/34 PPC. Rifles recovered at the instance of accused were not sent to Fire-Arm Expert in order to find out if the same were in working condition or not and benefit of such omission was to go to the accused. ACQUITTAL
1997 PCrLJ 169 Ilam Jan V/S The State (Peshawar DB).
S.302 PPC. Recovery of weapon of offence was highly doubtful which was not even kept in safe custody by the I.O. Delay of two months in sending the pistol and the empty to the Fire Arm Expert had not been properly explained. ACQUITTAL
1998 MLD 1281. Wahid Baksh & 3 Others V/S The State (FSC DB).
S.302/364/34 PPC. Alleged recovery of weapon like “Dangs” were of no consequence as those were not stained with blood and even deceased had not stated that he had been inflicted injuries by accused with “Dangs”. Recovery of other articles belong to deceased, was also of no consequence in view of contradictory statement of prosecution witnesses. Evidence of recovery neither connected accused with crime nor advanced case of prosecution. In view of grave doubts about guilt of accused, they were acquitted
1998 MLD 1608. Maleek @ Malika V/S The State (Lahore).
S.302/364 PPC. Recovery of pistol, allegedly used in occurrence, from possession of accused was of no consequence and recovery of such normal type of weapon, would hardly connect accused with commission of offence where no empty alongwith the weapon was sent to the expert for examination. Overall assessment of the circumstantial evidence did not inspire confidence to maintain conviction. ACQUITTAL
NLR 1998 CrLJ 83. Shafaqat Ali V/S The State (Lahore).
Recovery of weapon of offence would become doubtful when none of residents of locality was asked to witness recovery in clear disregard of S.103 CrPC.
NLR 1998 CrLJ 120 Muhammad Sadiq V/S The State.
Recovery of crime weapon from accused would be inconsequential when report of Forensic Science Laboratory was in negative.
NLR 1998 CrLJ 700. Iftikhar Ahmed Dar V/S The State (Karachi).
S.302/34 PPC. Recovery of crime weapon after lapse of about five days would not be believable.
1998 PCrLJ 598. Saeed Ahmed V/S The State (Lahore).
S.302 PPC. Crime empty though had been found to be wedded with revolver but report of Forenisc Science Laboratory was that weapon recovered from accused was in working condition and that fact remained that it was found from person of accused at the time of his arrest could not exonerate accused merely because crime empty was not found wedded. CONVICTION UPHELD
1998 PCrLJ 943. Abbas Ali V/S The State (Lahore).
S.302 PPC. Recovery of the weapon of offence on the last day of physical remand of 14 days of the accused was not free from suspicion, particularly when no independent public witness, who could be easily available, was joined in the recovery proceedings.
1998 PCrLJ 981. Innayatullah Khan V/S The State (Lahore DB).
S.302/392 PPC. Mere fact that the crime weapon, pistol did not match with the crime empties, would not lose evidentiary value in the presence of unimpeachable ocular account of occurrence and the witnesses who had caught accused at the spot.
1998 PCrLJ 1077. Zulfiqar Ahmed & Others V/S The State (Lahore).
S.302/34 PPC. Weapon of offence cannot retain blood stains on it for nearly two months.
1998 PCrLJ 1236. Abdullah Shah @ Babar Ali V/S The State (Lahore DB).
S.302/392/504/34 PPC. Sten gun allegedly used in occurrence, was recovered after more than one year from date of occurrence from the house easily accessible to everybody living jointly therein and such recovery was attested only by complainant while no person from locality was called and joined at the alleged time of recovery. Such recovery of offensive weapon which otherwise was violative of S.103 CrPC could not be granted any weight.
1998 PCrLJ 1933. Munawar Masih V/S The State (Lahore).
S.302 PPC. Recovery of the pistol, in the absence of the rport of Fire-Arms Expert, had no evidentiary value.
1998 SCMR 279. Muhammad Ashraf & 2 Others V/S The State (FB).
S.302/34 PPC. Recovery of the crime weapon from the accused in the absence of a positive report of the Ballistic Expert had rendered the prosecution case against him doubtful and the medical evidence in such circumstances could not furnish corroboration to the prosecution story against the accused. ACQUITTAL
1998 SCMR 1823. Sardar Khan & 3 Others V/S The State (FB).
S.302/34 PPC. Recovery of crime weapon and report of Ballistic Expert or other expert evidence being only confirmatory or explanatory of the direct and other circumstantial evidence cannot outweigh the trustworthy direct evidence in the case.
PLD 2000 SC 1. Khawand Baksh & Others V/S The State & Others (FB).
S.302/120-B/34 & 324 PPC. Rifle recovered from accused was not found to have matched with any of the crime empties recovered from the spot but was only found to have been fired without specifying the period of its use, which was an extenuating circumstances. DEATH SENT. ALTERED TO LIFE IMP.
2000 SCMR 919. Abdul Ghafoor V/S The State (FB).
S.302 PPC. Non-recovery of crime empties from the spot, in circumstances, was not fatal to the prosecution case. Defence evidence suggesting a different story was not supported by any material on record. No case having been made out in favour of accused on merits, delay in filing the time-barred appeal was not condoned in the absence of any cogent reasons. APPEAL DISMISSED
NLR 2001 SD 181. Mehboob Ali V/S The State (Peshawar).
S.302 PPC.Matching of crime empties with weapon would be a corroborative circumstance when no suspicion could be pointed out in respect of fabrication of crime empties. CONVICTION UPHELD
NLR 2001 SD 194. Munir Ahmed V/S The State (SC).
S.302 PPC.Recoveries of pistol and churri at instance of accused witnessed by I.O. would be reliable when no motive could be attributed to him for false involvement of accused. (2) It is not the requirement of law that crime empties found on the spot must be mentioned in FIR or inquest report. Rather the recovery memo, prepared in this respect is exhibited on record. CONVICTION UPHELD
2001 PCrLJ 453. Muhammad Fayyaz V/S The State (Quetta DB).
S.302(a) & (b) PPC. Accused having proved by the statements of eye-witnesses to have killed the deceased, it was immaterial if the recovery of the pistol at his instance was believed or disbelieved. Crime-empties secured from the place of incident had matched with the pistol recovered from the accused. No malice had been attributed to the Investigating Officer for sending the recovered incriminating articles with delay to the Expert, nor the defence had alleged substitution of crime weapon and empties. CONVICTION ALTERED
2001 PCrLJ 754. Haji Sabir & 9 Others V/S The State (Quetta DB).
S.302(c)/324/148 PPC. Delay in sending crime weapons to the Expert for examination was of no consequence in the absence of any enmity or ill-will alleged against the prosecution witness. CONVICTION UPHELD
2001 PCrLJ 746. Shoukat Hayat V/S The State (Lahore DB).
S.302(b), 324/337-F(iii), 327/337-D & 452 PPC. Ocular account of unimpeachable character was corroborated by the evidence of recovery of crime weapon, motive and admission of accused. Report of FSL showed that out of three crime-empties recovered from the place of occurrence two were found to have been fired from the pistol recovered from the accused. Discrepancy to the extent of one empty would not material affect the testimony of injured witnesses who had no reason to falsely involve the accused by substitution. DEATH SENT. CONFIRMED
2001 PCrLJ 773.Zahid Iqbal V/S The State (Lahore)
S.302(b) PPC. Evidence of recovery of weapon of offence (gun) was of no avail to the prosecution due to non-recovery of crime-empty and non-availability of Fire-Arm Expert’s report regarding its working condition. &nbs
1 : Bails 2 : Appreciation of Evidence
1: Bails
1991 PCrLJ 106 (Note 145) Noor Samand V/S The State (Lahore).
S.302/109/149. Neither any injury nor any motive was available against accused nor any crime empties of alleged firing was recovered from the place of occurrence. BAIL GRANTED
1991 PCrLJ 176 (Note) Arshad & Others V/S The State.
S..302/307/148/149 PPC. Accused was ascribed only general firing and no injury was attributed to him. No crime empty was recovered. BAIL GRANTED
1992 PCrLJ 559. Muhammad Afzal V/S The State (Lahore).
S.302/34 PPC. Accused was alleged to have fired 6/7 shots, yet not a single crime empty was secured. BAIL GRANTED
1992 PCrLJ 1679 Sanaullah V/S The State (Lahore).
S.302/307/148/149 PPC. No crime empty was recovered from spot nor from chamber of revolver recovered from accused. BAIL GRANTED
1995 PCrLJ 1942. Atta Hussain V/S The State (Lahore).
S.302 PPC. Recovery of Dopatta with which accused allegedly strangulated his daughter, was not very much material as same was not stained with blood and even otherwise such articles were easily available in every home. BAIL GRANTED
1996 PCrLJ 227. Muhammad Suleman V/S The State (Karachi DB).
S.324/148/149 PPC. None of accused persons was stated in the FIR to have been armed with a rifle but according to recovery memo 38 rifle empties, 150 Klashinkov empties and 95 gun empties had been secured from the place of occurrence and despite such a heavy firing no body from the complainant side was injured. BAIL GRANTED
1997 MLD 1146. The State V/S Hadan & another (Chief Court Gilgit).
S.302/34 PPC. Weapon of offence allegedly recovered from the accused and the crime empties secured in the case had not been sent to Arms Expert for matching. Court below, in circumstances, had rightly exercised its discretion by enlarging the accused on bail. BAIL NOT CANCELLED
NLR 2004 CrLJ 910. Muhammad Bashir etc. V/S The State (Lahore)
S.302/109/148/149 PPC. Mere non-recovery of weapon of offence is no ground to grant bail to accused in a murder case when there is no reason for his false implication. BAIL REFUSED.
PLJ 2008 Cr.C.(Lahore) 983. Azhar V/S The State
S.302/34 PPC. Recovery of rifle. Held: In absence of any empty from the place of occurrence the recovery of rifle did not possess any corroborative value because without matching the empty with the rifle it cannot be presumed with any degree of certainty that the recovered rifle was the one which had been used in the occurrence. Case of further inquiry. BAIL GRANTED
2: Appreciation of Evidence
NLR 1991 CrLJ 314. Muhammad Hanif etc. V/S The State (Lahore).
S.302/34 PPC. Recovery of blood-stained churris nine days after occurrence from place accessible to every member of family, held, in absence of any independent witness, recovery did not inspire confidence and merited exclusion from consideration. ACQUITTAL
NLR 1991 CrLJ 720 Muhammad Sharif Khan V/S The State (SC AJK).
S.302 PPC. Delay in sending crime empties to expert is usually seen with doubt. Held, recovery of empties was not reliable as delay in sending the same for examination of expert did suggest tampering. ACQUITTAL
PLD 1992 SC 570. Muhammad Tahseen V/S Saleem Akhtar & others.
S.302 PPC. Previous statement of the eye-witnesses recorded U/S 161 CrPC indicates that they were not sure about the weapon of offence. Eye-witness account, held, stood negated in circumstances and High Court was fully justified in not relying on the eye-witnesses account of solitary evidence. APPEAL AGAINST ACQUITTAL DISMISSED.
NLR 1994 CrLJ 78. Nazir Ahmed V/S The State (Lahore).
S.302 PPC. Recovery of gun would not be of any help to prosecution when no empty was recovered from spot. ACQUITTAL
NLR 1994 CrLJ 160. Muhammad Asghar V/S The State (Lahore).
S.302 PPC. Mere fact that knife recovered at the instance of accused was not stained with blood, would be no ground to discard evidence of recovery. APPEAL DISMISSED
NLR 1994 CrLJ 325. Abdul Jabbar V/S The State (Lahore DB).
S.302 PPC. Evidentory value of recoveries. Recovery of crime empties, their despatch to Forensic Science Laboratory and then wedding with pistol recovered at instance of accused, cannot be relied upon when other evidence on record has thrown sufficient dust on veracity of recovery evidence. ACQUITTAL
1994 PCrLJ 566. Imran Choudhry V/S The State (Lahore).
S.302 PPC. Recovery of gun at the instance of accused had no evidentary value. No independent corroboration was brought on record to prove guilt of the accused. ACQUITTAL
1994 SCMR 1928. Muhammad Iqbal V/S The State.
S.302/149 PPC. Where no empty was recovered from the spot, the recoveries of fire arm from the accused were of no consequence.
1995 MLD 379 Sajjan & 2 Others V/S The State (Karachi DB).
S.302/114/34 PPC. Recovery of empty cartridges did not connect the accused with the crime. APPEAL ACCEPTED
KLR 1995 CrC 46. Jamal Nasir V/S The State (Lahore).
S.302 PPC. Effecting recovery of incriminating danda when it was lying open in the room after lapse of many days by the police seemed absurd. Hence not believable. APPEAL ACCEPTED
NLR 1995 CrLJ 483. Khizar Ali V/S The State (Lahore DB).
S.302 PPC. Recovery of gun would be of no help to prosecution when no empty was recovered from scene of occurrence. ACQUITTAL
NLR 1995 CrLJ 783. Muhammad Ashraf @ Kalia V/S The State (Bahawalpur).
S.302 PPC. Crime empties not mentioned in FIR and Zimnis would not be free from doubt. ACQUITTAL
1995 PCrLJ 48. Fateh Sher & Others V/S The State (Lahore DB).
S.302/307/148/149 PPC. Recovery of fire arms was not of any consequence as no empties had been found. ACQUITTAL
PLD 1995 Lahore 440 Abdul Wahad & Others V/S The State (DB).
S.302/34 PPC. No crime empty having been recovered from the spot, recovery of gun from accused was of no help to prosecution. ACQUITTAL
1995 SCMR 896. Zafar Hayat V/S The State.
S.302 PPC. Recovery of gun could not be relied upon, same having not been sent for examination of the Fire Arm Expert. APPEAL ALLOWED
1995 SCMR 1730 Riaz Masih @ Mithoo V/S The State (DB).
S.302 PPC. Ocular evidence having been excluded from consideration, the only recovery of blood-stained knife from the accused by itself was not sufficient for his conviction on murder charge, which even otherwise appeared to be doubtful. ACQUITTAL
PLD 1996 Quetta (DB). 40 Abdul Jabbar V/S The State.
S.302 PPC. Accused in his statement U/S 342 CrPC admitted recovery of crime weapon at his instance. Accused having himself led the police to a particular place for recovery of the crime weapon, two independent and respectable inhabitants of the locality to witness the recovery proceedings were not required.
1997 MLD 1322. Abdul Rehman @ Bakhu & another V/S The State (Lahore).
S.302/34 PPC. Rifles recovered at the instance of accused were not sent to Fire-Arm Expert in order to find out if the same were in working condition or not and benefit of such omission was to go to the accused. ACQUITTAL
1997 PCrLJ 169 Ilam Jan V/S The State (Peshawar DB).
S.302 PPC. Recovery of weapon of offence was highly doubtful which was not even kept in safe custody by the I.O. Delay of two months in sending the pistol and the empty to the Fire Arm Expert had not been properly explained. ACQUITTAL
1998 MLD 1281. Wahid Baksh & 3 Others V/S The State (FSC DB).
S.302/364/34 PPC. Alleged recovery of weapon like “Dangs” were of no consequence as those were not stained with blood and even deceased had not stated that he had been inflicted injuries by accused with “Dangs”. Recovery of other articles belong to deceased, was also of no consequence in view of contradictory statement of prosecution witnesses. Evidence of recovery neither connected accused with crime nor advanced case of prosecution. In view of grave doubts about guilt of accused, they were acquitted
1998 MLD 1608. Maleek @ Malika V/S The State (Lahore).
S.302/364 PPC. Recovery of pistol, allegedly used in occurrence, from possession of accused was of no consequence and recovery of such normal type of weapon, would hardly connect accused with commission of offence where no empty alongwith the weapon was sent to the expert for examination. Overall assessment of the circumstantial evidence did not inspire confidence to maintain conviction. ACQUITTAL
NLR 1998 CrLJ 83. Shafaqat Ali V/S The State (Lahore).
Recovery of weapon of offence would become doubtful when none of residents of locality was asked to witness recovery in clear disregard of S.103 CrPC.
NLR 1998 CrLJ 120 Muhammad Sadiq V/S The State.
Recovery of crime weapon from accused would be inconsequential when report of Forensic Science Laboratory was in negative.
NLR 1998 CrLJ 700. Iftikhar Ahmed Dar V/S The State (Karachi).
S.302/34 PPC. Recovery of crime weapon after lapse of about five days would not be believable.
1998 PCrLJ 598. Saeed Ahmed V/S The State (Lahore).
S.302 PPC. Crime empty though had been found to be wedded with revolver but report of Forenisc Science Laboratory was that weapon recovered from accused was in working condition and that fact remained that it was found from person of accused at the time of his arrest could not exonerate accused merely because crime empty was not found wedded. CONVICTION UPHELD
1998 PCrLJ 943. Abbas Ali V/S The State (Lahore).
S.302 PPC. Recovery of the weapon of offence on the last day of physical remand of 14 days of the accused was not free from suspicion, particularly when no independent public witness, who could be easily available, was joined in the recovery proceedings.
1998 PCrLJ 981. Innayatullah Khan V/S The State (Lahore DB).
S.302/392 PPC. Mere fact that the crime weapon, pistol did not match with the crime empties, would not lose evidentiary value in the presence of unimpeachable ocular account of occurrence and the witnesses who had caught accused at the spot.
1998 PCrLJ 1077. Zulfiqar Ahmed & Others V/S The State (Lahore).
S.302/34 PPC. Weapon of offence cannot retain blood stains on it for nearly two months.
1998 PCrLJ 1236. Abdullah Shah @ Babar Ali V/S The State (Lahore DB).
S.302/392/504/34 PPC. Sten gun allegedly used in occurrence, was recovered after more than one year from date of occurrence from the house easily accessible to everybody living jointly therein and such recovery was attested only by complainant while no person from locality was called and joined at the alleged time of recovery. Such recovery of offensive weapon which otherwise was violative of S.103 CrPC could not be granted any weight.
1998 PCrLJ 1933. Munawar Masih V/S The State (Lahore).
S.302 PPC. Recovery of the pistol, in the absence of the rport of Fire-Arms Expert, had no evidentiary value.
1998 SCMR 279. Muhammad Ashraf & 2 Others V/S The State (FB).
S.302/34 PPC. Recovery of the crime weapon from the accused in the absence of a positive report of the Ballistic Expert had rendered the prosecution case against him doubtful and the medical evidence in such circumstances could not furnish corroboration to the prosecution story against the accused. ACQUITTAL
1998 SCMR 1823. Sardar Khan & 3 Others V/S The State (FB).
S.302/34 PPC. Recovery of crime weapon and report of Ballistic Expert or other expert evidence being only confirmatory or explanatory of the direct and other circumstantial evidence cannot outweigh the trustworthy direct evidence in the case.
PLD 2000 SC 1. Khawand Baksh & Others V/S The State & Others (FB).
S.302/120-B/34 & 324 PPC. Rifle recovered from accused was not found to have matched with any of the crime empties recovered from the spot but was only found to have been fired without specifying the period of its use, which was an extenuating circumstances. DEATH SENT. ALTERED TO LIFE IMP.
2000 SCMR 919. Abdul Ghafoor V/S The State (FB).
S.302 PPC. Non-recovery of crime empties from the spot, in circumstances, was not fatal to the prosecution case. Defence evidence suggesting a different story was not supported by any material on record. No case having been made out in favour of accused on merits, delay in filing the time-barred appeal was not condoned in the absence of any cogent reasons. APPEAL DISMISSED
NLR 2001 SD 181. Mehboob Ali V/S The State (Peshawar).
S.302 PPC.Matching of crime empties with weapon would be a corroborative circumstance when no suspicion could be pointed out in respect of fabrication of crime empties. CONVICTION UPHELD
NLR 2001 SD 194. Munir Ahmed V/S The State (SC).
S.302 PPC.Recoveries of pistol and churri at instance of accused witnessed by I.O. would be reliable when no motive could be attributed to him for false involvement of accused. (2) It is not the requirement of law that crime empties found on the spot must be mentioned in FIR or inquest report. Rather the recovery memo, prepared in this respect is exhibited on record. CONVICTION UPHELD
2001 PCrLJ 453. Muhammad Fayyaz V/S The State (Quetta DB).
S.302(a) & (b) PPC. Accused having proved by the statements of eye-witnesses to have killed the deceased, it was immaterial if the recovery of the pistol at his instance was believed or disbelieved. Crime-empties secured from the place of incident had matched with the pistol recovered from the accused. No malice had been attributed to the Investigating Officer for sending the recovered incriminating articles with delay to the Expert, nor the defence had alleged substitution of crime weapon and empties. CONVICTION ALTERED
2001 PCrLJ 754. Haji Sabir & 9 Others V/S The State (Quetta DB).
S.302(c)/324/148 PPC. Delay in sending crime weapons to the Expert for examination was of no consequence in the absence of any enmity or ill-will alleged against the prosecution witness. CONVICTION UPHELD
2001 PCrLJ 746. Shoukat Hayat V/S The State (Lahore DB).
S.302(b), 324/337-F(iii), 327/337-D & 452 PPC. Ocular account of unimpeachable character was corroborated by the evidence of recovery of crime weapon, motive and admission of accused. Report of FSL showed that out of three crime-empties recovered from the place of occurrence two were found to have been fired from the pistol recovered from the accused. Discrepancy to the extent of one empty would not material affect the testimony of injured witnesses who had no reason to falsely involve the accused by substitution. DEATH SENT. CONFIRMED
2001 PCrLJ 773.Zahid Iqbal V/S The State (Lahore)
S.302(b) PPC. Evidence of recovery of weapon of offence (gun) was of no avail to the prosecution due to non-recovery of crime-empty and non-availability of Fire-Arm Expert’s report regarding its working condition. &nbs
No comments:
Post a Comment