Pakistan Case Law← Search
2000 P Cr. L J 7

THE STATE vs ABDUL GHAFOOR KHAN NIAZI and anothers

Citation2000 P Cr. L J 7
CourtFederal Shariat Court
Case No.Criminal Appeal No,287/L of 1995
Date1998-10-05
Judge(s)Sardar Muhammad Sarfraz Dogar, M. Mehboob Ahmed
ResultAppeal dismissed

' M. MEHBOOOB AHMED, C.J.--- Abdul Ghafoor and Wali Saif, respondents were acquitted vide judgment, dated 5-7-1995 delivered by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Lahore in a case registered against them under Articles 3 and 4 of the Prohibition (Enforcement of Hadd) Order, 1979.

The State has come up in this appeal seeking reversal thereof.

2. The allegations against the respondents were that narcotic heroin/opium, were recovered from their possession in a raid conducted by the Anti-Narcotics Task Force party headed by Muhammad Ilyas, P.W.S.

3. We have gone through the record and the impugned judgment with the assistance of the learned Assistant Advocate-General,

4. Confronted with the contents of pants, 25 and 26 of the impugned judgment which relate to the recovery and sampling of the material allegedly recovered from the respondents and obviously the main plank of the prosecution case the learned Assistant Advocate-General has not been able to give any plausible reason to differ with the findings recorded by the learned trial Court: 5.Legitimate inferences appear to have been drawn by the learned trial Court from the documents on record and the testimony of witnesses and no valid exception thereto can be raised or has been raised by the learned Assistant Advocate-General, The observations of the trill Court that when the documentary evidence is contradictory to the oral evidence no reliance can be placed on the oral testimony and that it is well-established rule of appreciation of evidence that a person can tell a lie but documents do not so are also based on sound judicial pronouncements,

6. It may further be observed that the overall perusal of the impugned judgment further indicates that all the findings reached have valid basis and there is no justification to differ with them. The learned Assistant Advocate-General very candidly submitted that she is faced with a difficult situation to find fault with the impugned judgment and we do appreciate her difficulty as nothing possibly can be urged to seek reversal of the judgment. Nothing, whatsoever, having been urged against the judgment in question in this appeal, the same is maintained and resultantly the appeal is dismissed,

Cited by 2 cases

For educational and research use only β€” not legal advice. Verify against the official report before relying on it. See our Disclaimer.
DisclaimerΒ·PrivacyΒ·TermsΒ·Search