LAHORE (Muhammad Ashfaq) – The Lahore High Court has ruled that property cannot be declared case evidence solely on the basis of police claims, approving a petitioner’s request for custody of one cow, three buffaloes, one bull and Rs300,000.
Justice Tariq Mahmood Bajwa issued an eight-page verdict on a petition filed by Nisar Ahmad, setting aside the trial court’s decision that had denied the release of the seized property.
According to the judgment, a case had been registered against the petitioner over alleged embezzlement of 1,024 sacks of wheat. The petitioner argued that the investigating officer had seized his cow, buffaloes and cash during the investigation.
Police claimed the petitioner had allegedly purchased the livestock by selling embezzled wheat and therefore the animals and cash constituted case property.
The court held that during an investigation, property cannot be treated as case evidence merely on the basis of police assertions. It stated that solid, admissible and reliable evidence is required to establish that any property represents proceeds of crime.
The judgment further stated that an investigating officer cannot declare an item case property solely on personal opinion, adding that deciding custody of seized property falls within the court’s authority, not that of the investigating officer.
The court also observed that a co-accused’s confession before police does not constitute legally admissible evidence. It noted there was no evidence on record proving that the allegedly embezzled wheat had been sold, nor any proof regarding the sale amount or whether the proceeds were used to purchase the livestock.
The court ruled that no reliable material existed to establish that the livestock and cash were proceeds of crime and said they could not be declared case property solely on the basis of a co-accused’s police statement.
The court further observed that at the custody stage, preliminary satisfaction based on available evidence is necessary and held that the trial court failed to properly assess the facts.
The court ordered that the petitioner may regain custody of the livestock after submitting surety bonds worth Rs3 million.