| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2026 SLG 1069 2026 SLD 1069 = 2026 SCMR 582 |
Supreme Appellate Court, Pakistan
Jail Petition No. 367 of 2021, decided on 17th October, 2025. (Against the judgment dated 08.06.2021 of the Peshawar High Court, Peshawar passed in Criminal Appeal No. 600-P of 2018).
Presented By: Athar Minallah, Irfan Saadat Khan and Malik Shahzad Ahmad Khan, JJ
Arshad Hussain Yousafzai, Advocate Supreme Court for Petitioner. Altaf Khan, Additional Advocate General, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa for the State. Date of hearing: 17th October, 2025.
Jail Petition No. 367 of 2021, decided on 17th October, 2025. (Against the judgment dated 08.06.2021 of the Peshawar High Court, Peshawar passed in Criminal Appeal No. 600-P of 2018).
Presented By: Athar Minallah, Irfan Saadat Khan and Malik Shahzad Ahmad Khan, JJ
Arshad Hussain Yousafzai, Advocate Supreme Court for Petitioner. Altaf Khan, Additional Advocate General, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa for the State. Date of hearing: 17th October, 2025.
ASIF ---Petitioner
VERSUS
The STATE ---Respondent
Law: Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997
Section: 9C
Control of Narcotic Substances Act (XXV of 1997)--- ----S. 9(c)---Possession of narcotic substances---Reappraisal of evidence--Benefit of doubt---Safe transmission of the sealed parcels from the police station to the Forensic Science Laboratory not proved---Prosecution case was that considerable quantity of narcotic substance was recovered from the vehicle driven by the accused-petitioner---Record indicated that the samples were handed over to a Constable, who had delivered the sealed parcels at the office of the Forensic Science Laboratory---Said Constable was not produced as witness; neither the prosecution had brought on record reliable, trustworthy and confidence inspiring evidence to prove the safe transmission of the sealed parcels from the police station to the Forensic Science Laboratory---Failure on part of the prosecution to prove safe transmission of the sealed samples from the police station to the Forensic Science Laboratory had profoundly affected the evidentiary value of the positive report submitted by the latter---Said fact had created doubt regarding the safe transmission of the samples and had raised question relating to the samples as being the same which were separated from the narcotic substance seized on the eventful day---Therefore, the benefit of doubt, as of right to the appellant, could not have been withheld---Appeal against conviction was allowed, in circumstances. JUDGMENT ATHAR MINALLAH, J.---Asif son of Rauf (appellant) had challenged his conviction and sentences by filing Jail Petition No.367 of 2021 and it was converted into an appeal and allowed vide our short order of even date. The appellant was acquitted from the charge framed against him by extending the benefit of doubt. Consequently, the judgments of the trial court and the High Court dated 04.06.2018 and 08.06.2021 respectively were set aside. We are, therefore, now recording our reasons in support of the acquittal of the appellant. The appellant was arrested on 04.11.2016 after considerable quantity of narcotic substance was recovered from the secret cavities of the vehicle driven by him. The appellant was nominated in Crime Report No.1150 dated 04.11.2016 registered…