| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2021 SLG 1744 2021 SLD 1744 2021 PCRLJ 811 |
Lahore High Court
Criminal Appeal No. 499 of 2018, heard on 5th March, 2020, Date of hearing: 5th March, 2020.
RAJA SHAHID MEHMOOD ABBASI, JUSTICE, CH. ABDUL AZIZ, JUSTICE
Ch. Sajid Raza for Appellant. Shahid Mehmood, Deputy Prosecutor General for the State.
Criminal Appeal No. 499 of 2018, heard on 5th March, 2020, Date of hearing: 5th March, 2020.
RAJA SHAHID MEHMOOD ABBASI, JUSTICE, CH. ABDUL AZIZ, JUSTICE
Ch. Sajid Raza for Appellant. Shahid Mehmood, Deputy Prosecutor General for the State.
ZEESHAN IRSHAD
VS
THE STATE
Law: Control of Narcotics Substances Act, 1997
Section: 9(c)
(a) Control of Narcotic Substances Act (XXV of 1997)--- ----S. 9(c)---Possession of narcotics---Appreciation of evidence---Benefit of doubt---Scope---Accused was convicted for having been found in possession of 1300 grams of charas---Trial Court while framing charge against the accused had mentioned the date of recovery of charas as 27-11-2017, whereas both the recovery witnesses had deposed that the charas was recovered on 28-11-2017---Likewise, during cross-examination, both the recovery witnesses had denied the suggestion that the accused was taken into custody on 27-11-2017---Such an anomaly had gained more importance in the context that even in the crime report the recovery was stated to have been effected on 27-11-2017---Lacuna regarding the date of occurrence had shattered the prosecution case---Recovery witnesses while appearing in the dock had unanimously deposed that out of the recovered substance, 65 grams were separated for chemical analysis, however, the weight of sample parcel was found by Forensic Laboratory to be 69.90 grams---High Court observed that the parcel sent for chemical analysis was not the representative sample of the recovered charas---Appeal against conviction was accepted, in circumstances. (b) Criminal trial--- ----Administration of justice---Mistake in releasing a criminal was better than punishing an innocent person. Ayub Masih v. The State PLD 2002 SC 1048 rel. (c) Criminal trial--- ----Benefit of doubt--- Scope--- Prosecution case, for securing conviction, must not suffer from infirmities and the guilt of accused was required to be proved beyond scintilla of doubt---If any doubt emerges from the prosecution case, there was no reason to withhold its benefit on the ground that the case was of heinous nature. (d) Criminal trial--- ----Benefit of doubt---Scope---Benefit of every reasonable doubt was to be extended to the accused which could best be provided through the of acquittal. JUDGMENT CH. ABDUL AZIZ, J.--- Zeeshan Irshad (appellant) involved in case FIR No.569/2017 dated 28.11.2017 registered under section 9(c) of the Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997 (hereinafter referred to as CNS Act, 1997) at Police Station…
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