| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2016 SLG 3864 2016 SLD 3864 2016 YLR 2173 |
Lahore High Court
Criminal Appeal No. 1572 of 2006, heard on 10th November, 2015. Date of hearing: 10th November, 2015.
MUHAMMAD ANWAARUL HAQ AND CH. MUSHTAQ AHMED, JUSTICE
Muhammad Latif Khawaja for Appellant. Rana Abdul Majeed, Deputy Prosecutor General for the State.
Criminal Appeal No. 1572 of 2006, heard on 10th November, 2015. Date of hearing: 10th November, 2015.
MUHAMMAD ANWAARUL HAQ AND CH. MUSHTAQ AHMED, JUSTICE
Muhammad Latif Khawaja for Appellant. Rana Abdul Majeed, Deputy Prosecutor General for the State.
RAFAQAT ALI
VS
. THE STATE--Respondent
Law:
Section:
(a) Control of Narcotic Substances Act (XXV of 1997)----- -----Ss. 9 (c) & 6-----Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), S. 103-----Possession of narcotic drugs etc.-----Appreciation of evidence-----Police officials as sole recovery witnesses, competency of-----Principles-----Accused was alleged to have been arrested while he was in possession of forty kilogram of "Poast"-----Trial Court, having convicted accused, sentenced him to undergo life imprisonment along with payment of fine-----Recovery witnesses had fully supported the complainant's version-----Prosecution witnesses had been put to lengthy cross-examination, but defence could not shatter their testimony on material points like date, time and place of recovery of contraband material from the accused-----Prosecution case was although based on the testimony of police officials only, but no ill-will or animosity had been brought on record during investigation and trial, that could prompt the police witnesses to falsely involve the accused in present case-----Police witnesses were as good and competent witnesses as anybody else, unless they were proved to be inimical against the accused-----Report of Chemical Examiner was positive, which had corroborated the ocular account furnished by the prosecution witnesses-----Prosecution had proved the charge against the accused beyond shadow of reasonable doubt-----Appeal was dismissed accordingly. (b) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)----- -----S. 103-----Search to be made in presence of witnesses-----Object of S.103, Cr.P.C.-----Police officials as sole recovery witnesses, competency of----- Principles----- General tendency exists that people from public are reluctant to become witnesses due to fear of desperate persons-----Non-association of members of public in recovery proceedings is neither a requirement of law nor an absolute rule-----Main aim and object of enacting S.103, Cr.P.C. is to ensure that the search and recovery is conducted honestly and fairly and to exclude the possibility of concoction and transgression-----Section 103, Cr.P.C. is never meant to disbelieve official witnesses under any circumstance. Yaqoob Shah v. The State PLD 1976 SC 53;…
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