Law: Control of Narcotics Substances Act, 1997

Section: 9(c),25

Control of Narcotic Substances Act (XXV of 1997)--- ----Ss. 9(c) & 25---Control of Narcotic Substances (Government Analysts) Rules, 2001, Rr.4 & 5---Possession of narcotic---Appreciation of evidence---Police on basis of spy information, signalled accused to stop at a police picket but he tried to speed away and escape---Accused was ultimately arrested and 18 kilograms of heroin was recovered from the vehicle he was driving---No contradictions existed regarding receipt of spy information, laying of police picket (nakabandi) on the spot, arrival of vehicle of accused, recovery of heroin weighing 18 kilograms and taking out of samples from each and every packet for analysis---Report of Chemical analysis was in positive---Since there was no objection that recovered substance was unsealed or tampered with or manipulated, therefore, delay in sending samples would not affect the result of their analysis---Rules 4 & 5 of Control of Narcotic Substances (Government Analysts) Rules, 2001 were advisory and not mandatory---Failure to follow said Rules did not render the search, seizure and arrest under Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997 an absolute nullity and non est---Regarding contention of accused that samples had not been taken from each recovered packet, it was not necessary to take samples from each packet as required evidence had been produced to connect the report with the case property---Association of private persons as witnesses was not necessary in the present case as S.103, Cr.P.C. had been excluded in narcotic cases by virtue of S.25 of Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997---Accused had failed to clarify as to what he was doing at the relevant time in the vehicle in question from which huge quantity of heroin was recovered and as to why he did not stop the vehicle at the picket when signalled by the police and tried to speed away---Prosecution had produced trustworthy ocular and circumstantial evidence to connect accused with the commission of the offence---Appeal was dismissed accordingly. 2003 SCMR 52; PLD 2005 Kar. 4; 2008 MLD 314; 2003 PCr.LJ 82 and 2000 PCr.LJ 755 distinguished. 2006 MLD 1121; PLD 2006 Pesh. 39; 1988 SCMR 1899; 2003…

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