Law:

Section:

(a) Control of Narcotic Substances Act (XXV of 1997)--- ----S. 9(c)---Possession of narcotic substance---Appreciation of evidence---Prosecution case was that 20,700 grams opium was being carried by the accused---Prosecution produced four witnesses in order to prove charge against the accused---Police after arrest of accused had fulfilled all the legal and codal formalities, which were in line with the version taken by the prosecution---Record showed that Investigating Officer, who had conducted the investigation, supported the prosecution case as taken place in the mode and manner---Accused could not justify his presence at the place of occurrence at night time with such a huge quantity of opium---Huge quantity of contraband could not be planted by the police officials, as admittedly the area where the occurrence had taken place was known for such kind of activities---Prosecution case had further been corroborated by the positive report of Forensic Science Laboratory---Though, there was delay in sending the sample to Chemical Examiner, yet the same would be inconsequential as there was no evidence that the samples were tainted---All the witnesses had deposed in line with the prosecution case---Witnesses were subjected to a lengthy cross examination but the defence failed to shatter their testimony---Circumstances established that the of conviction and sentence passed against the accused was based on correct application of evidence on record---Appeal against conviction was dismissed in circumstances. (b) Criminal trial--- ----Site plan---Evidentiary value---Site plan is not a substantive piece of evidence, but corroborative piece of evidence and its non-preparation by no means dilutes the whole version of the prosecution. (c) 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 S.103, Cr.P.C.---Scope---Defence had contended that no private witness was associated at the time of recovery, which was violation of provision of S. 103, Cr.P.C.---Validity---Application of S. 103, Cr.P.C. had been excluded in such cases in view of S. 25 of Control of…

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