Lawyers Directory Listing
Chat with us free on WhatsApp — tell us your city and legal matter and our team connects you with the right lawyer. No form, no fee.
Criminal Revision No. 473 of 1984, decided on 29th November, 1984.
‑‑‑S.13‑‑Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), S.439‑‑Arms licence‑‑Mere recovery of pistol and cartridges could not make accused liable for offence under S.13 of Ordinance, 1965 unless it was proved that he was not holding licence for same‑‑Nothing on record to show that accused had no licence for pistol and cartridges recovered from him‑‑Conviction and sentence set aside.
Syed Ahmad Hussain Bukhari for Petitioner.
Dil Muhammad Tarar for the State.
Date of hearing: 28th October, 1984.
The facts giving rise to this petition are that Allah Rakha petitioner was tried by Magistrate 1st Class, Gujranwala under section 13 of the Arms Ordinance, 1965. To prove this case prosecution examined three witnesses. Qurban Head Constable P.W.1, Salamat Ali Khan A.S.I. P.W.2 and Ghulam Mustafa P.W.3 have stated that pistol P/1 and two cartridges were recovered from the custody of the petitioner. When examined under section 342, Cr. P. C. The petitioner denied incriminating circumstances. In defence he produced Muhammad Bashir.
2. The learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the prosecu tion has only proved the recovery of pistol and cartridges from the petitioner and that there is nothing on record that he had no licence to keep the same. The learned counsel for the State has frankly conceded that the prosecution has not cared to prove as to whether the petitioner had any licence or not.
3. I have considered the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties with care. I find that mere recovery of pistol and cartridges would not make the petitioner liable for offence under section 13 of the Arms Ordinance unless it is proved that he was not holding licence for the same. Unfortunately in the case in hand there is nothing on record to show that the petitioner was not having licence for the pistol and cartridges or that any unlicensed pistol and cartridges were recovered from him. In this view of the matter there is no option but to set aside the conviction and sentence of the petitioner and acquit him of the charge.
4. For what has been stated above, the revision is accepted, the petitioner shall be released forthwith if not required in any other case.
M. Y. H. Revision accepted.
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
🔍 Find a Lawyer