Law: Control of Narcotics Substances Act, 1997

Section: 9(c),29

Law: Juvenile Justice System Ordinance, 2000

Section: 11

Law: Juvenile Justice Rules, 2001

Section: 6

Law: Control of Narcotic Substances (Government Analysts) Rules, 2001

Section: 4,5

(a) Control of Narcotic Substances Act (XXV of 1997)--- ----S. 9(c)---Possessing and trafficking of narcotics---Appreciation of evidence---Both Station House Officer of Police Station, the seizing officer and prosecution witness, who were marginal witness of the recovery memo being star witnesses of the prosecution, had furnished the ocular account of the occurrence---Both had corroborated each other on all material particulars of the incident; such as the mode and manner of reaching of accused at the spot in the motorcar; its chase by the Police party; and recovery of narcotics from the same and had established their presence at the spot at the time of arrest of accused; and recovery from the vehicle driver---Said witnesses were subjected to lengthy and searching cross-examination, but their testimony could not be shattered on material aspects of the case---Chemical Analysis Report with regard to contraband, was positive---Burden of proving that accused were not in possession or knowledge of the contraband in the motor car, was upon accused persons, but they failed to appear and explain the same---Accused persons had furnished different versions regarding their travelling at the odd hours of night, which did not appeal to a prudent mind---Recovery of arms and ammunition from accused had further supplemented the story of prosecution---Plea of substitution and false implication, raised by accused was nothing, but merely an attempt to hide their own guilt---False, fabricated and afterthought defence version, had rightly been rejected by the Trial Court---Accused had failed to attract any circumstance to create doubt in the prosecution case qua his innocence---In view of huge quantity of 3 maunds of backed charas and its price which was in million, question of foisting the same against accused, did not appeal to a prudent mind---No evidence was available to show previous ill-will, grudge, enmity or rancour of accused persons with prosecution witnesses---Mere fact that witnesses were Police Officials, would not discard their testimony because Police Officials, were as good witnesses like others, and their testimony could be relied upon unless and until any enmity…

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