2021 PLP 1552 (SCMR)
STATE through Director ANF — Petitioner Versus AURANGZEB and another — Respondents
| Citation | 2021 PLP 1552 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | Supreme Court of Pakistan |
| Bench Members | Mazhar Alam Khan Miankhel and Qazi Muhammad Amin Ahmed, JJ |
| Parties | STATE through Director ANF — Petitioner Versus AURANGZEB and another — Respondents |
| Primary Law | Control of Narcotic Substances Act (XXV of 1997) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2021 PLP 1552 (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Control of Narcotic Substances Act (XXV of 1997) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2021 PLP 1552 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Supreme Court of Pakistan bench comprising: Mazhar Alam Khan Miankhel and Qazi Muhammad Amin Ahmed, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2021 PLP 1552 (SCMR) (STATE through Director ANF — Petitioner Versus AURANGZEB and another — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Muhammad Tariq, Special Prosecutor, ANF for Petitioner (in both cases).
- Nemo for Respondents (in both cases).
Headnotes / Summary
(Against the order dated 14.11.2019 passed by the Peshawar High Court Peshawar passed in Cr. A. No.104-P of 2019)
Ss. 9(a) & 9(c)
Constitution of Pakistan, Art. 185(3)
Possession of 18.6 kilograms of methamphetamine comprised of 34000 tablets
Petition for leave to appeal challenging conversion of conviction from S. 9(c) to S. 9(a) of Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997 and resulting reduction in sentence and fine
Contentions on behalf of prosecution that the High Court by considering the samples sent for forensic analysis as deficient in terms of the law declared in the case reported as Ameer Zaib v. The State (PLD 2012 SC 380) had misdirected itself by applying the principle laid down in the said case in disregard to the nature, shape and format of the contraband recovered, which was uniquely integrated into small tablet form, incapable of traditional sampling suggested in the said case; that the Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997 covered a wide range of "narcotic drugs, psychotropic substances or controlled substances" manufactured, marketed and administered through various mediums other than usual chunks of shaped pieces and, thus, in the peculiar circumstances of the present case, dispatch of 34 tablets (as samples), from each lot, squarely constituted representative samples, leaving no space for a contra hypothesis; that any other interpretation or approach would defeat the legislative intent
Supreme Court granted leave to consider the said contentions of the prosecution. Ameer Zaib v. The State PLD 2012 SC 383 rel.
Judgment & Decree
QAZI MUHAMMAD AMIN AHMED, J.
Commonality of the issue binding Cr. P.26-P of 2020 with Cr. P.27-P of 2020, directed against Aurangzeb and Malook, respondents, respectively, necessitates a joint consideration. The respondents were hauled up, on 28.11.2017, by a contingent of Anti-Narcotic Force Peshawar with 18.600 kilograms of methamphetamine, a synthetic psychoactive drug, designated as a contraband within the contemplation of section 8 of the Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997; it comprised of 34000 tablets, wrapped in packets, comprising two lots, separately secured from different points; 34 tablets from each lot were sent for forensic analysis that confirmed their narcotic character as "Metamfetamine, Benzodiazepine, Phencyclindine and Morphine".
2. Indicted under clause (c) of Section 9 of the Act ibid, respondents claimed trial that resulted into their conviction thereunder; vide judgment dated 29.01.2019, they were sentenced to imprisonment for life with a direction to pay fine in the sum of rupees one million each; the High Court, however, considering the samples for forensic analysis as deficient in terms of law declared by this Court in Ameer Zaib case (PLD 2012 SC 383) altered their conviction in appeals, separately filed by the convicts, into clause (a) of the section ibid and reduced their sentences to the periods already undergone by them with a substantial reduction in the fine vide impugned judgment dated 14.11.2019, vires whereof, are being assailed on the grounds that there was no occasion for the High Court after maintaining the convictions to reduce convicts' sentences on a premise hardly sustainable in law. The learned counsel elaborated his point of view by arguing that the High Court had misdirected itself to apply the principle laid down in the supra case in disregard to the nature, shape and format of the contraband, uniquely integrated into small tablet form, incapable of traditional sampling suggested in the case; he next argued that the Control of Narcotic Substances Act covered a wide range of "narcotic drugs, psychotropic substances or controlled substances" manufactured, marketed and administered through various mediums other than usual chunks of shaped pieces and, thus, in the peculiar circumstances of case, dispatch of 34 tablets, from each lot, squarely constituted representative samples, leaving no space for a contra hypothesis. Any other interpretation or approach would defeat the legislative intent and purpose, concluded the learned Law Officer. Leave is granted to examine the validity of above position. Send for the respondents through bailable warrants in the sum of Rs.200,000/- each, returnable to the Assistant Registrar of this Court at Peshawar. Station House Officer shall execute the warrants within a fortnight. MWA/S-40/SC Leave granted.