Case Details

Citation(s)
2021 SLG 2544 2021 SLD 2544 2021 PCRLJ 1334
Lahore High Court
Criminal Appeal No. 70487 of 2019, heard on 8th June, 2021, Date of hearing: 8th June, 2021.
ANWAARUL HAQ PANNUN, JUSTICE, MUHAMMAD AMJAD RAFIQ, JUSTICE
Nasir Khan Afridi assisted by Jahanzeb for Appellant. Ch. Humayoun Aslam, Deputy Prosecutor General for
Respondents.

TAHIR NAQASH

VS

THE STATE AND ANOTHER

Law: Control of Narcotics Substances Act, 1997

Section: 9(C)

Law: Police Rules, 1934

Section: 22.70

Law: Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984)

Section: 87

(a) Control of Narcotic Substances Act (XXV of 1997)--- ----S. 9(c)--- Possession of narcotics---Appreciation of evidence---Scope---Accused was alleged to have been found in possession of 16 kilograms of heroin--- Recovery of contraband was proved through the testimony of three witnesses, being recovery witnesses and the witness who took the complaint to police station for registration of FIR---Later had deposed that after registration of FIR, he had returned back to place of recovery with a copy of FIR along with the Investigating Officer---Presence of Investigating Officer at the place of occurrence was also proved and defence could not challenge his testimony---Prosecution had succeeded in proving the charge beyond shadow of reasonable doubt---Appeal against conviction was dismissed, in circumstances. (b) Control of Narcotic Substances Act (XXV of 1997)--- ----S. 9(c)---Police Rules, 1934, R. 22.70---Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984), Art. 87---Possession of narcotics---Store-Room Register---Certified copies of public documents---Scope---Accused was alleged to have been found in possession of 16 kilograms of heroin---Examination of entry in Register No. XIX (Store-Room Register as prescribed in R. 22.70 of the Police Rules, 1934) showed that name of police station and district was not mentioned in the page brought on record---Public documents could be proved through production of certified copies yet they should be in the form as required under Art. 87 of the Qanun-e-Shahadat, 1984---Register No. XIX was not duly proved; therefore, any page/part of register brought on record without formal proof amounted to improper admission of evidence---If such practice was allowed to continue then every junior ranked police official while bringing on record any register while claiming it as genuine, real and true without the knowledge of senior officers in the hierarchy of police station or the department could thwart the sanctuary of prosecution case---Entry of Register No. XIX produced in evidence, being not certified through process of law, was rejected. JUDGMENT MUHAMMAD AMJAD RAFIQ, J.--- Through this appeal under section 48 of the Control of Narcotic Substances Act,…
🔒
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