Case Details

Citation(s)
2022 SLG 1390 2022 SLD 1390 2022 PCRLJ 1088
Lahore High Court, Multan Bench, Multan
Criminal Appeal No. 312-J of 2019, heard on 7th April, 2021.
MUHAMMAD WAHEED KHAN AND FAROOQ HAIDER, JJ
Shafique Ahmad Chaudhry for Appellant. Riaz Ahmad Saghla, Additional Prosecutor General for the State.

VS

The STATE

Law: Control of Narcotics Substances Act, 1997

Section: 9(c),9

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

Section: 133

(a) Control of Narcotic Substances Act (XXV of 1997)--- ----S. 9(c)---Possession of narcotics---Appreciation of evidence---Safe custody---Scope---Accused was alleged to have been found in possession of 1250 grams of charas---Complainant had deposited the samples in the Forensic Laboratory and after sampling for analysis, the remaining portion of case property from the applicable items was sealed and handed over by Forensic Laboratory to the evidence submitting person but the prosecution did not produce any witness to prove that the case property was delivered back to Moharir or anybody else---Safe custody of the case property/sample, after sampling by the Forensic Laboratory till production in the Court, could not be proved---Since prosecution had failed to prove its case against the accused beyond shadow of doubt, therefore, there was no need to discuss the defence version--- Appeal against conviction was allowed, in circumstances. (b) Control of Narcotic Substances Act (XXV of 1997)--- ----S. 9---Possession of narcotics---Safe custody---Scope---If safe custody of allegedly recovered substance/case property has not been proved in narcotics cases, then, there is no need to discuss other merits of the case and it straightaway leads to the acquittal of the accused. (c) Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984)--- ----Art. 133--- Cross-examination--- Incomplete cross-examination---Effect---Where statement of complainant was recorded in a case by the Trial Court and his cross-examination was reserved but subsequently he did not make himself available for cross-examination though efforts were made to procure his attendance, High Court observed that his statement without cross-examination could not be termed as legal statement and had lost its evidentiary value, therefore, could not be relied upon being unreliable piece of evidence. JUDGMENT FAROOQ HAIDER, JUSTICE:---.--- This appeal has been filed by Abid Ali (appellant) against the judgment dated: 04.04.2019 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge (MCTC), Khanewal, whereby in case arising out of FIR No.391/2016 dated: 14.07.2016 (Ex.PA/1) registered under section 9(c) of the Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997 at…
🔒
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