Law: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)

Section: 103,340(2),342,382-B

Law: Pakistan Penal Code, 1860

Section: 193,196

Law: Control of Narcotics Substances Act, 1997

Section: 9(c),25

(a) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)--- ----S.342---Statement of accused---Fact not put to accused---Effect---Unless circum stance sought to be used against accused is put to him during examination under S.342, Cr. P. C., that circumstance cannot be used against him---Omission to draw attention of accused person to a circumstance to be used against him is prejudicial to him, therefore, such circumstance can neither be considered, nor used against him for any purpose. Rasool Muhammad v. Asal Muhammad and 3 others 1995 SCMR 1373 rel. (b) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)--- ----S.340(2)---Statement of accused in defence-Scope-Such statement if found reasonably possible from material on record, then accused can be given benefit of doubt and acquitted. Waris case PLD 1981 SC 127 and Safdar Ali's caes PLD 1953 FC 93 rel. (c) Control of Narcotic Substances Act (XXV of 1997)--- ----S. 9(c)---Possession of narcotic drugs---Appreciation of evidence---Defence evidence---Charas weighing 10 kilograms and heroin weighing 8 kilograms were recovered from both the accused--Trial Court convicted both the accused under S.9(c) of Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997, and sentenced them to 14 years imprisonment and fine---Plea raised by accused was that their defence evidence was not considered by Trial Court---Validity---After arrest of accused persons neither any complaint nor any application was moved by them or their relatives against complainant--Documents produced by one of the accused with his statement under S. 342 Cr.P.C. pertained to years, 1999 and 2000, whereas offence was committed in year, 2004, much after the petition was filed by a relative of one accused and prosecution witnesses were not party in those proceedings---Prosecution witnesses could not be disbelieved who had given consistent evidence on each and every aspect of the case---High Court declined to interfere in conviction and sentence awarded to accused by Trial Court---Appeal was dismissed in circumstances. Banwari Lal and another v. Emperor AIR 1920 Allahabad 203; Emperor v. Akub AliMazumdar and others AIR 1920 Calcutta 522; Mst. Jeejal and another v. The State 2005 MLD 1261; Shafiullah v. The…

Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492