MATWALLI alias MUTALLI vs THE STATE
This criminal appeal arises from a trial where the appellant, Matwalli alias Mutalli, was acquitted of charges under sections 302, 392, 397, 109, and 412 read with section 34 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860 by the Special Court for Speedy Trials No. VI, Bahawalpur. Despite the acquittal, the trial court ordered the confiscation of the appellant's licensed gun, which was not involved in the alleged incident. The core legal question before the High Court was whether the trial court possessed the legal authority to confiscate a licensed weapon that was unrelated to the commission of the offense for which the accused was acquitted. The High Court held that in the absence of any nexus between the licensed weapon and the alleged crime, the confiscation order was unsustainable. Consequently, the Court allowed the appeal and directed the restoration of the licensed gun to the appellant. The judgment affirms the principle that property not connected to the commission of an offense cannot be confiscated by the State upon the acquittal of the accused.
- Can a trial court confiscate a licensed weapon belonging to an accused person who has been acquitted of the charges?
- Is a licensed weapon that was not used in the commission of an alleged offense subject to confiscation by the State?
- Section 302, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 392, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 397, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 109, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 412, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 34, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
1. MUHAMMAD SHARIF, J.--- The appellant faced trial under sections 302, 392, 397, 109, 412 read with section 34, P.P.C. The appellant Matwalli alias Mutalli and his co-accused Rehmat Ali were acquitted by the learned Judge Punjab, Special Court for Speedy Trials No,VI, Bahawalpur on 8-2- 1989. Even after the acquittal of the appellant, his licensed gun was ordered to be confiscated. The said gun was not used during this incident. The appellant has submitted that his licensed gun may be given to him and may not be confiscated in favour of the State. Learned A.A.-G. Does not oppose this legal position. We, therefore, accept this appeal and order restoration of the licensed gun to the appellant. The appeal stands disposed of.
Cited by 4 cases
- Sardar Ahmed vs Adil and another PLJ 2020 Cr.C. (FSC) 1149, 2022 YLR 138
- HALEEMA SADIA Versus SHAKEEL AHMED 2016 GBLR 199
- SHER MUHAMMAD Versus STATE 1992 MLD 307
- IMDAD ALI vs THE STATE 1990 P Cr. L J 1661