Section 13 (e) Criminal Code of Conduct (v. 1898), Section 103, the testimony of the prosecution for appreciation of unlicensed evidence, did not support the prosecution, nor did the real weapons recovery memo appear by the prosecution. Nor was the only witness of the recovery allegedly examined. The prosecution did not include any evidence related to the fact that the gun was fired from this office, to ascertain whether the suspect was in the possession. Whether or not another weapon was recovered, was not submitted by the prosecution to establish any means. The suspect had Malik / Dera make a rifle instead of a rifle which was handed over to him / delivered. The recovered weapon was not sealed on the spot, the police did not join a respected / independent private person in the area to witness the recovery, with no appreciable explanation given by the Recovery Officer that, under the circumstances, 103 elements were violated, CRPC accused was acquitted from Central CA. Filed against it under section 409, the PPC neither sealed the weapon on the spot, neither the forensic / ballistic expert's opinion nor the trial court could prosecute the accused. Nor, during the detention with the police under the circumstances, the original rifle was recovered by the Investigating Officer under the direction of the Investigation Officer, but could not be displayed in this case, the prosecution failed to prove its case against the accused. , Except with reasonable doubts, he was punished, and he was acquitted, of the circumstances.
Related judgments — Karachi High Court Sindh, 2013
