| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2011 SLG 6613 2011 SLD 6613 2011 PCRLJ 1334 |
Sindh High Court
Criminal Appeal No. 169 of 2009, decided on 25th April, 2011.Date of hearing: 18th December, 2010.
Before Gulzar Ahmed and Imam Bux Baloch, JJ
Muhammad Ashraf Kazi for Appellants. Khadim Hussain, D.P.-G. for the State.
Criminal Appeal No. 169 of 2009, decided on 25th April, 2011.Date of hearing: 18th December, 2010.
Before Gulzar Ahmed and Imam Bux Baloch, JJ
Muhammad Ashraf Kazi for Appellants. Khadim Hussain, D.P.-G. for the State.
SAFAR-UR-REHMAN and another---Appellants
VS
THE STATE---Respondent
Law: Control of Narcotics Substances Act, 1997
Section: 9(c)
(a) Control of Narcotic Substances Act (XXV of 1997)--- ----S. 9(c)---Possessing narcotics---Appreciation of evidence---Serious contradictions on material aspects of the case appeared in prosecution evidence---Veracity of the F.I.R. and memo. of recovery and arrest, meant to connect the accused with the crime having not been unanimously proved by the prosecution witnesses, the same had made the prosecution case doubtful---Absence of prosecution evidence regarding sending of the sample of contraband "Charas" to Chemical Examiner, or it being highly contradictory, had made his report unreliable---Material allegedly recovered from the accused was not produced in the court at the trial, rather some other material had been introduced in evidence, for which there was no explanation---Packet of "Charas" from which sample was statedly taken had been produced in the court in unsealed condition and thus tampering thereof could not be ruled out---Only one circumstance creating reasonable doubt in a prudent mind about the guilt of accused would be sufficient to make him entitled to benefit of doubt, whereas many such circumstances were available in the present case, which did not justify the conviction of accused---Accused were acquitted in circumstances. Gulshan Ara v. The State 2010 SCMR 1162 and Tariq Pervez v. The State 1995 SCMR 1345 ref. (b) Control of Narcotic Substances Act (XXV of 1997)--- ----S. 9(c)---Possessing narcotics---Appreciation of evidence---Benefit of doubt, extension of---Concept of benefit of doubt is deep rooted in the judicial system---Single circumstance, and not many creating reasonable doubt in a prudent mind about the guilt of accused, would entitle him to benefit of doubt, not as a matter of grace and concession, but as a matter of right. Tariq Pervez v. The State 1995 SCMR 1345 ref. JUDGMENT GULZAR AHMED, JUSTICE:---.--- By this Criminal Appeal, the appellants have challenged the judgment dated 20-7-2009, passed by the Special Court CNS, Mirpurkhas, by which they have been convicted under section 9(c) of Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997 (the Act) and sentenced to suffer R.I. for life imprisonment and to pay fine of Rs.50,000 each, in…
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