| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2023 SLG 863 2023 SLD 863 2023 MLD 285 |
Balochistan High Court
Criminal Appeal No. 273 of 2021, decided on 14th October, 2022. Date of hearing: 24th August, 2022.
Before Muhammad Kamran Khan Mulakhail and Shaukat Ali Rakhshani, JJ
Khalil Ahmed Panezai for Appellant. Yahya Baloch, Additional Prosecutor General for the State.
Criminal Appeal No. 273 of 2021, decided on 14th October, 2022. Date of hearing: 24th August, 2022.
Before Muhammad Kamran Khan Mulakhail and Shaukat Ali Rakhshani, JJ
Khalil Ahmed Panezai for Appellant. Yahya Baloch, Additional Prosecutor General for the State.
Syed HIDAYATULLAH-----Appellant
VERSUS
The STATE-----Respondent
Law: Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997
Section: 9(c)
Law: Control of Narcotic Substances (Government Analysts) Rules, 2001
Section: 5,6
(a) Control of Narcotic Substances Act (XXV of 1997)--- ----S. 9(c)---Possession of narcotics---Appreciation of evidence---Benefit of doubt---Prosecution case was that 15 Kg charas was recovered from the secret cavity of vehicle driven by the accused--- Contradictions were found in the statements of witnesses---Safe custody and transmitting of samples of narcotic from police to the FSL was not established---Neither the secret cavity was taken into possession separately after un-assembling the vehicle nor was produced before the Court for its examination---Appeal was allowed and accused was acquitted of the charge. (b) Control of Narcotic Substances Act (XXV of 1997)--- ----S. 9(c)---Control of Narcotic Substances (Government Analysts) Rules, 2001, Rr. 5, 6---Possession of narcotics---Appreciation of evidence---In the present case, the protocols as envisaged under Rr. 5, 6 of Control of Narcotic Substances (Government Analysts) Rules, 2001 were not followed---FSL report was inconclusive as neither quadruplicate copies of FSL report were prepared nor the requisite test for determining the material to be charas were undertaken---Prosecution had failed to prove the case beyond any glimpse of doubt, thus, the appeal was allowed and impugned passed by Trial Court was set aside and consequently, the accused was acquitted of the charge. Imam Bakhsh v. The State 2018 SCMR 2039; Zubair Khan v. The State 2021 SCMR 492 and Khair-ul-Bashir v. The State 2019 SCMR 390 ref. (c) Criminal trial--- ----Benefit of doubt---Scope---Benefit of doubt is a universal law, thus if it arises in a case, it must be extended to the accused as it is better to err in acquitting 99 culprits than to convict an innocent. JUDGMENT SHAUKAT ALI RAKHSHANI, J.---Being dismayed, Syed Hidayatullah has brought the captioned appeal, whereby, he has impugned the judgment dated 31.05.2021 (impugned judgment) drawn by learned Special Judge of the Court constituted under the Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997, Khuzdar (Trial Court), whereby, appellant was convicted under section 9(c) of the Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997 (Act of 1997) and sentenced to suffer life imprisonment with fine 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