| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2017 SLG 2138 2017 SLD 2138 2017 YLR 604 |
Lahore High Court
Cr. A. No. 81 of 2010, hearing Date : 05-11-2015.
AALIA NEELUM, JUSTICE, SARDAR MUHAMMAD SARFRAZ DOGAR, JUSTICE
Ch. Nawaar-ul-Haq Pannun for Appellant. Muhammad Akhlaq, D.P.G. for the State.
Cr. A. No. 81 of 2010, hearing Date : 05-11-2015.
AALIA NEELUM, JUSTICE, SARDAR MUHAMMAD SARFRAZ DOGAR, JUSTICE
Ch. Nawaar-ul-Haq Pannun for Appellant. Muhammad Akhlaq, D.P.G. for the State.
AFTAB
VS
THE STATE AND OTHERS
Law:
Section:
Control of Narcotic Substances Act (XXV of 1997)--- ----Ss. 9(b) & 6----Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), S. 516-A, Second proviso---Possession of narcotic drugs etc.---Appreciation of evidence---Safe custody of narcotic substance, requirement of---Two reports of Chemical Examiner, first negative and second positive, regarding same substance were available on record---Second sample parcel was prepared without permission of Magistrate---Effect---Heroin weighing five hundred grams, was alleged to have been recovered from possession of the accused while he was transmitting the same---Trial Court convicted the accused and sentenced him for imprisonment for five years along with payment of fine---Prosecution had not established safe custody of the recovered substance, as reports of the Chemical Examiner regarding the same were contradictory---Prosecution witness deposed during cross-examination that he had delivered the sample parcel to the office of Chemical Examiner, but his report revealed that said sample did not contain heroin---Prosecution witness deposed that he had prepared a fresh sample of the case property and sent the same to Chemical Examiner after moving an application to Magistrate in that regard; neither such application nor order passed on the same by the Magistrate were available on record, which had falsified the prosecution case---Said witness also deposed that at time of preparing the sample, Moharrar was not with him---Said witness, having prepared the second sample of the case property, had sent the same to Chemical Examiner without any permission of the Magistrate---Section 516-A, second proviso, Cr.P.C. empowered the court to order, suo motu or on an application of any party and under its supervision and control, to obtain and prepare samples of the case property---Another prosecution witness also claimed during cross-examination that the second sample parcel had been handed over to him---Said contradiction with regard to the date of preparing and handing over of the second sample parcel to the Moharrar had created serious doubt; therefore, no implicit reliance could be placed on such type of evidence---Nothing was available on record…
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