Section 411 Conviction of Martyrs (10 of 1984), Arts 117 and 120 Receiving stolen property from dishonesty The defendants were convicted by the trial court for appreciating the evidence and sentenced to imprisonment because they were stolen. Property was recovered Property of the property was illegal Section 111111 was not sufficient to compel a crime under PPC, but it also had to establish that the person who seized the stolen property was dishonest. The property was obtained or retained, or was always prosecuted for reasons or belief that it was stolen. Proving the essential elements of crime: In the event of failure by the prosecution to prove the legal components, ie the acquisition or retention of property belonging to someone else, the property is being stolen, found in possession and recovery. The existence of knowledge or belief on the part of the person. And the retention was dishonest, no conviction could be prosecuted, for the offense under section 411, pp. C, must prove not only that the property was stolen but also that the theft must be established. The person accused of seizing the property was either aware of the theft of property or had reasonable grounds to believe it was stolen. Prosecutors failed to prove the possession of the accused did not result in the recovery of the accused from their original and conscious possession. Rather, it was impacted by the passenger bus, driven by the co-offender High Court, under the jurisdiction of the review The courts and sentenced to separate prison. The accused was acquitted of the charge, reviewing the circumstances allowed
Related judgments — Quetta High Court Balochistan, 2014
