Case Details

Citation(s)
2017 SLG 598 2017 SLD 598 2017 MLD 288
Balochistan High Court
Criminal Jail Appeal No. 15 of 2016, decided on 8th September, 2016, Heard on: 29th August, 2016.
MUHAMMAD HASHIM KHAN KAKAR, JUSTICE, ABDULLAH BALOCH, JUSTICE
Muhammad Khair Mengal for Appellant. Muhammad Younas, Additional P.G. for the State.

SHAHID DADA --Appellant

VS

THE STATE --Respondent

Law:

Section:

(a) Control of Narcotic Substances Act (XXV of 1997)--- ----S.9(c)---Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), S.103---Possession of narcotic substance---Appreciation of evidence---Non association of private person as witness---Validity---Contraband was allegedly recovered from a populated area of the locality---Prosecution witnesses were police officials---No private witness had been associated by the Investigating Officer at the time of alleged recovery despite having spy information about the offence---Admittedly, Investigating Officer did not call any private witness to associate the proceedings---Manner of recovery therefore had lost its sanctity---Appeal was allowed and conviction and sentences recorded by trial court against accused were set-aside in circumstances. (b) Control of Narcotic Substances Act (XXV of 1997)--- ----Ss.9(c) & 25---Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), S.103---Possession of narcotic substance---Appreciation of evidence---Benefit of doubt---Applicability of S. 103, Cr.P.C.---Scope---Contraband was allegedly recovered from a populated area of the locality---No private witness was associated in the recovery proceedings, which was violation of S. 103, Cr.P.C.---Fact remained that S. 25 of Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997, excluded the applicability of S. 103, Cr.P.C. in narcotics cases, but there should be some plausible explanation on the record that attempts were made to associate any independent witness from the locality---Record had shown that no such efforts/attempts were made by the Investigating Officer---Accused had pleaded his false implication and also denied his arrest from the place of occurrence---Association of an independent witness was necessary to attest the recovery proceedings---Circumstances of the case had created serious doubt in the case of prosecution, benefit of which resolved in favour of accused---Appeal was allowed and conviction and sentences recorded by trial court against accused were set-aside in circumstances. (c) Control of Narcotic Substances Act (XXV of 1997)--- ----S. 9(c)---Control of Narcotic Substances (Government Analysts) Rules, 2001, R. 4(2)---Seizure of narcotic---Chemical analysis…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register

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