Al Wakeelo
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Petitioner: MUHAMMAD RASHID VS Respondent: THE STATE
1976 P Cr
1976 P Cr. L J 701
[Lahore]
Before Javid Iqbal and Abdul Jabbar Khan, JJ
MUHAMMAD RASHID--Appellant
Versus
THE STATE‑Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 372 of 1974, heard on 4th June 1975.
West Pakistan Arms Ordinance (XX of 1965)‑--
----‑‑‑S. 13‑Recovery ‑ Evidence ‑ Recovery witnesses having no motive to falsely implicate accused‑‑Testimony of recovery witnesses corroborated by one another‑ Conviction and sentence maintained, in circumstances.‑[Witness‑Recovery].
Ch. Nazir Ahmad Khan and Khan Zia‑ud‑Din for Appellant.
Sh. Iftikhar Ali for the State.
Date of hearing : 4th June 1975.
JUDGMENT
JAVID IQBAL, J.‑----The appellant has been convicted under section 13 of the West Pakistan Arms Ordinance XX of 1965, for being in possession of an unlicensed revolver P. 1 which contained one crime empty P. 2 in its chamber and three live cartridges P. 3/1‑3 in its other chamber and was sentenced to undergo one year R. I. vide judgment dated the 2nd of May 1974, of the Sessions Judge, Lahore. He has appealed against his conviction and sentence. The case of the prosecution is that the appellant was arrested on the 18th of November 1971, by Ghulam Abbas S. 1. P. W. in connection with the murder of Muhammad Boats in the connected Murder Reference No. 109 of 1974 and Criminal Appeal No. 371 of 1974. He remained under interrogation and on the 22nd of November 1971, led to the recovery of unlicensed revolver P. 1 etc. which was taken into possession vide memo. Exh. P. A. In support of its case the prosecution examined Ghulam Abbas S. I. P. W. and Mauls Bakhsh (P. W. 2) who were the witnesses of this recovery. The appellant denied the alleged recovery and pleaded false implication. It toad been stated that Maula Bakhsh (P. W. 2) was maternal uncle of the deceased and, therefore, his testimony was not reliable. However, Ghulam Abbas S. I. P. W. was also the other attesting witness of this recovery and we have no reason to disbelieve his testimony In any case Maula Bakhsh P. W. had also no motive to falsely implicate the appellant. The testimony of the recovery witnesses is corroborated by one another We have already maintained the conviction and sentence of the appellant in the connected murder case. In the circumstances in our opinion, the prosecution has succeeded in establishing its case as against the appellant His conviction as well as sentence under section 13 of the West Pakistan Arms Ordinance XX of 1965 were therefore quite proper and are accordingly maintained. This appeal is dismissed.
Appeal dismissed.