Case Details

Citation(s)
2018 SLG 1941 2018 SLD 1941 2018 PLJ 437
Lahore High Court
Crl. Appeal No. 1697 of 2011, heard on 15.01.2018.
MISS AALIA NEELUM, JUSTICE CH. MUSHTAQ AHMAD, JUSTICE
Mr. Aqeel Atif Chatha, Advocate for Appellant. Mr. Muhammad Waqas Anwar, Deputy Prosecutor General for State.

SHAFQAT ALI

VS

STATE AND ANOTHER

Law:

Section:

Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997 (XXV of 1997)-- ----S. 9(c)--Criminal Procedure Code, (V of 1898), S. 410--Appeal against acquittal--Conviction and sentence--Challenge to--Benefit of doubt--Recovery of contraband substance--Case property--Not proved safe custody--Burden of responsibility on prosecution--Contradiction in statements of PWs--Strong suspicion about prosecution story--Held: It is considered opinion of Court that inconsistencies and contradictions considered cumulatively do lead to irresistible influence that prosecution has not been able to prove safe custody of parcels of samples drawn from alleged recovered substance and remaining case property through material and cogent evidence--There is another aspect of case of glaring contradiction in statements of prosecution witnesses, also making case of prosecution highly doubtful--No evidence to connect Chemical Examiner Reports with substance that was seized from possession of appellant--PW has specifically deposed that he handed over ten (10) parcels of charas and one parcel of opium to PW for onward transmission to office of Chemical Examiner--Said contradiction in deposition of aforementioned police officials cannot be stated to be minor and irrelevant in absence of positive and material evidence--In such eventuality it is not possible to uphold and sustain of conviction and sentence against appellant--Accordingly appellant deserves to be given benefit of doubt and findings in this regard are to be set aside--Further held: Prosecution has not been able to prove its case beyond all reasonable doubts against accused/appellant, for offence u/S. 9(c) of Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997--Conviction of appellant are liable to be set aside--Appeal is accepted. Evidence-- ----Important piece of evidence--Alleged car--Contraband recovered from car--Contraband substance was found lying in foot of accused in car but car was not taken into possession by complainant--Most important piece of evidence was car allegedly used in contraband trafficking and contraband was recovered from car but car was not taken into custody, which extract nexus with edifice of prosecution story. THIS JUDGMENT…
🔒
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