| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2003 SLG 595 2003 SLD 595 2003 SCMR 1237 |
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Criminal Petition No. 195-L of 2002, decision dated: 2-01-2003. (On appeal from the judgment, dated 17-1-2002 of the Lahore High Court, Lahore passed in Cr.A. No.513 of 1997)
JAVED IQBAL AND FAQIR MUHAMMAD KHOKHAR, JJ
Ch. Hasan-ul-Haq Bhalli, Advocate Supreme Court and Ch Mehdi Khan Mehtab Advocate-on-Record for Petitioner. Nemo for the State
Criminal Petition No. 195-L of 2002, decision dated: 2-01-2003. (On appeal from the judgment, dated 17-1-2002 of the Lahore High Court, Lahore passed in Cr.A. No.513 of 1997)
JAVED IQBAL AND FAQIR MUHAMMAD KHOKHAR, JJ
Ch. Hasan-ul-Haq Bhalli, Advocate Supreme Court and Ch Mehdi Khan Mehtab Advocate-on-Record for Petitioner. Nemo for the State
MUHAMMAD HANIF
VS
THE STATE
Law:
Section:
(a) Control of Narcotic Substances Ordinance (XXV of 1997)--- ----Ss.9, 21 & 22---Criminal. Procedure Code (V of 1898), S.537---When the prosecution had established the factum of recovery beyond shadow of doubt and proved the accusation to the hilt, and no other officer of higher rank than A.S.-I., who was incharge of the Police Station, was available, raid conducted and investigation made by the said police officer in violation of the provisions as contained in Ss.21 & 22 of the Control of Narcotic Substances Ordinance, 1997, would not vitiate the trial and at the most such an irregularity could be cured under S.537, Cr.P.C. as it had caused no prejudice to the accused. State v. Bashir PLD 1997 SC 408 and Shivbhat v. Emperor AIR 1928 Bom. 162 ref. (b) Control of Narcotic Substances Ordinance (XXV of 1997)--- ----Ss.29 & 9---Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), S.103---Raid was conducted as a result of tip-off to the Assistant Sub-Inspector of Police (the complainant) when he was patrolling and it was not possible for him to have completed the time consuming formalities at the cost of disappearance of the accused---Contention concerning violation of S.103, Cr.P.C. was fallacious in the light of S.29 of the ordinance --- Provision of S.103, Cr.P.C had been excluded in the light of S.29 of the Control of Narcotic Substances Ordinance, 1997---Reluctance of general public to become witness to such-like cases was a judicially recognized fact and there was no option left but to consider the statement of an official witness as no legal bar had been imposed in that regard---Police official were equally good witnesses and could be relied upon if their testimony remained unshattered during cross-examination. Hayat Bibi v. Muhammad Khan 1976 SCMR 128; Yaqoob Shah v The State PLD 1976 SC 53; Muhammad Naeem v. State 1992 SCMR 1617 and Muhammad v. State PLD 1981 SC 635 ref. ORDER JAVED IQBAL, J.---As a result of raid conducted pursuant to a tip-off the petitioner was apprehended at railway station by Said Khan (A.S.-I./complainant) Incharge Railway Police, Mianwali alongwith police party and 5-1/2 kilograms opium was recovered from the petitioner and a case was…
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