2023 PCrLJ 1720
Safe custody and safe transmission of samples to the Forensic Science Laboratory not established---Benefit of doubt---Prosecution case was that 33 maunds crushed dodas of post were recovered in 35 toras and two boras from the truck, driven by the accused---In the trial, it was essential for the prosecution to establish through cogent and convincing evidence that the alleged contraband was seized from the possession of the accused and was kept in Safe custody in the Malkhana at police station and thereafter samples separated from each tora/bora of contraband were sent to the office of Chemical Examiner for analysis but there was no explanation for prosecution's failure to establish Safe custody of recovered contraband---Samples so deposited in the office of Chemical Examiner could not be tagged with samples taken from the seized substance from the possession of the accused---Thus, no evidence was available to connect the report of Chemical Examiner with the substance that was seized from the possession of the accused---In that view of the matter the prosecution had not been able to establish that after the alleged recovery the substance so recovered was either kept in Safe custody or that the samples taken from the recovered substance had safely been transmitted to the office of the Chemical Examiner without the same being tampered with or replaced while in transit---Circumstances established that the prosecution had failed to prove its case against the accused beyond any shadow of doubt---
2023 PCrLJ 1437
Safe custody of crime empties not established---Accused was charged for committing murder of the brother of the complainant by firing---Admittedly, the Investigating Officer, returned to the police station after conducting proceedings at the place of occurrence, and a search of the accused, and visiting the hospital---Prosecution evidence remained silent as to where five parcels of crime empties remained during the said period and in whose custody---Prosecution failed to establish by cogent evidence that the alleged parcels of crime empties seized from the place of occurrence were kept in Safe custody ---Report in question was of no help to the prosecution as there was nothing on record to prove that the recovery of five crime empties alleged to have been made by the members of the Forensic Science Agency Team, were the same which were recovered from the place of occurrence---Thus, there could be no dispute that it was incumbent upon the prosecution to produce members of the Forensic Science Agency Team who had collected the crime empties and prepared separate parcels in order to prove the chain of Safe custody ---Without such proof, report of Forensic Science Agency could not corroborate the case of prosecution
0 Comments