2025 Y L R 838
[Balochistan]
Before Muhammad Kamran Khan Mulakhail and Shaukat Ali Rakhshani, JJ
MIR HASSAN---Appellant
Versus
The STATE--- Respondent
Criminal Jail Appeal No. 91 of 2023, decided on 25th November, 2024.
Pakistan Arms Ordinance (XX of 1965) ---
----S. 13(e) ---Possession of illicit weapon--- Appreciation of evidence ---Nature and
purpose of recovered knife not established---Prosecution case was that during
interrogation of a murder case, the appellant made disclosure and got recovered the crime weapon i.e. knife from a room of his house ---Record showed that on the pointation
of appellant, a knife was recovered from a room of his house hidden beneath a blanket ---
Record showed that the prosecution had failed to establish that the knife recovered from the appellant was not a kitchen knife or that it was not used in good faih for carrying on a profession, which was a pre- requisite of the indictment--- Moreso, on closure of the
prosecution evidence, the trial Court also failed to put question to the appellant in
respect of use of the recovered knife not being a kitchen knife ---Thus in absence of such
question in order to seek explanation, such evidence could not be used against the appellant ---Appeal against conviction was allowed, in circumstances.
Miss. Naureen Fatima for Appellant.
Yahya Baloch Additional Prosecutor General ("APG") for the State.
Date of hearing: 14th November, 2024.
JUDGMENT
SHAUKAT ALI RAKHSHANI, J .--- Appellant has put in the captioned appeal to
set at naught the judgment dated 22.06.2023 ("impugned judgment") rendered by learned Additional Sessions Judge -II Lasbella at Hub ("Trial Court") arising out of FIR No.261 of
2020 (Ex.P/3- A) registered with Police Station City, Hub, whereby he was convicted and
sentenced under section 13 (e) of the Arms Ordinance of 1965 ("Ordinance of 1965") to suffer R.I for three (3) years with the premium of section 382- B of Criminal Procedure Code,
1898 ("Cr.P.C.").
2. Facts germane for disposal of the case in hand are that complainant Sikandar Shair
S.I.P (PW -1) got lodged crime report ibid on the basis of murasila (Ex.P/1- A) with the
averments that on 15.08.2022, the appellant during interrogation in a murder case vide FIR bearing No.266 of 2020 for the offences punishable under sections 302 and 34 P.P.C. made disclosure and got recovered the crime weapon i.e., knife, having 6 ½ inches length, width 1 ½ inches and handle having 4 inches length and one broken Oppo mobile phone hid inside the blankets from a room of his house situated at Ameer Abad.
The appellant was put on trial, where on commencement of the trial, the appellant
entered the plea of denial, thus, the prosecution in order to bring home the charge, produced three (3) witnesses, and after close of the prosecution side, the appellant was examined under section 342 of Cr.P.C., who denied the allegations and professed innocence, whereafter the appellant neither deposed on oath nor produce defence, henceforth on conclusion of the trial, the appellant was convicted and sentenced in the terms mentioned in the para supra.
3. Heard. Record gone through with the able assistance of learned counsel for the
parties, which reveals that on the pointation of the appellant a knife, having 6 ½ inches
length and 1 ½ inches width was recovered from a room of his house hid beneath the
blankets.
4. Bare reading of section 3 (1) (b) (iii) of Ordinance of 1965 reads as under;
"3. Definitions: (1) In this Ordinance, unless the context otherwise requires, the following expressions shall have the meanings hereby respectively assigned to them, that is to say --
(a)"ammunition" includes -
(i) …………………..
(ii) …………………..
(iii) …………………..
(iv) …………………..
(v) …………………..
(vi) …………………..
(b) "arms" includes -
(i) …………………..
(ii) …………………..
(iii) air pistols, bayonets, swords, sword- sticks daggers, knives with blades of four
inches or more (but not kitchen knives or knives used in good faith for the carrying on
of a profession), and flick- knives irrespective of the blade;]
(iv…………………..
(c) "cannon" includes -
(i) …………………..
(ii) …………………..
(iii) …………………..
(iv) …………………..
(v) …………………..
(vi) …………………..
(vii) …………………..
(viii) …………………..
(ix) …………………..
(d) "Government" means the "Federal Government for the whole of Pakistan and the "Provincial Government" in the case of a Province;
(dd) …………………..
(e) …………………..
(f) …………………..
(g) …………………..
[Emphasize added]
5. The prosecution has failed to establish that the knife recovered from the appellant was
not a kitchen knife or was not used in good faith for carrying on a profession, which is requisite of the indictment. Moreso, on closure of the prosecution evidence, the Trial Court also failed to put question to the appellant in respect of use of the recovered knife not being a kitchen knife, thus in absence of such question in order to seek explanation, such evidence cannot be used against the appellant.
6. For the foregoing reasons, we believe that the prosecution has failed to drive home
the charge against the appellant, but the Trial Court, while ignoring such aspect of the matter
by misreading the evidence convicted and sentenced the appellant contrary to law and facts,
henceforth, we are not inclined to maintain the conviction and sentence awarded to the appellant.
7. Corollary, the appeal is allowed and consequent thereto, the impugned judgment
passed by the Trial Court dated 22.06.2023 is set -aside and the appellant is acquitted of the
charge, who be released forthwith, if not incarcerated in any other case.
JK/153/Bal. Appeal allowed.This judgment is reproduced from a publicly available source for informational purposes and does not constitute legal advice. If you believe this listing contains an error,
let us know.