2012 PLP 567 (SCMR)
GUL BADSHAH — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent
| Citation | 2012 PLP 567 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | Supreme Court of Pakistan |
| Bench Members | Raja Fayyaz Ahmed and Tariq Parvez, JJ |
| Parties | GUL BADSHAH — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent |
| Primary Law | Control of Narcotic Substances Act (XXV of 1997) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2012 PLP 567 (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 2012 PLP 567 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Supreme Court of Pakistan bench comprising: Raja Fayyaz Ahmed and Tariq Parvez, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2012 PLP 567 (SCMR) (GUL BADSHAH — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Muhammad Zaman Bhatti, Advocate Supreme Court for Petitioner
- Date of hearing: 11th May, 2010.
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from the judgment dated 28-5-2009 of the Lahore High Court, Rawalpindi Bench passed in CSR No.6-N-2006 and Criminal Appeal No.135 of 2006).
S. 9(c)
Constitution of Pakistan, Art. 185(3)
Leave to appeal was granted by Supreme Court to consider; whether quantum of sentence was appropriate punishment awarded to accused or he could have been punished to imprisonment for life having the effect of deterrence as well. Syed Ali Imran, D.P.-G. for the State.
Judgment & Decree
RAJA FAYYAZ AHMED, J.
A huge quantity 171 Kilograms of Charas, 70 Kilograms of opium and 3 Kilograms of Heroin was recovered from the truck loaded with bricks being driven by the petitioner from the secret cavities of the vehicle. After trial, the learned Additional Sessions Judge/Special Judge CNS, Taxila, District Rawalpindi found the petitioner guilty on the charge and was sentenced to death. The record and proceedings of the case were transmitted to the learned Lahore High Court, Rawalpindi Bench for confirmation of the death sentence. The petitioner was further directed to pay a fine of Rs.1,00,000 or in default thereof to further undergo RI for one year. He also challenged his conviction and sentence by filing Criminal Appeal No.135 of 2006. Vide impugned judgment, the conviction and sentence awarded to the petitioner has been maintained and the sentence of death confirmed. In consequence, the Murder Reference was answered in affirmative. Resultantly, the Criminal Appeal of the petitioner was dismissed.
2. According to the learned counsel, the petitioner claimed to be innocent and took the plea in his statement recorded under section 342, Cr.P.C. that he had no knowledge being the driver of the vehicle in question that the illicit substances were concealed in the secret cavities of the truck. Apart from the merits of the case, it has been contended by the learned counsel that extreme penalty of death in the circumstances of the case was unwarranted.
3. The learned DPG states that appropriate punishment has been awarded to the petitioner in view of the huge quantity of the narcotics recovered from the truck being driven by the petitioner at the relevant time.
4. Having considered the submissions put forth on behalf of the parties and having gone through the impugned judgment and the evidence on record with their assistance, we are inclined to grant leave only on the question of quantum of sentence being appropriate punishment awarded to the petitioner or that he could have been punished to imprisonment for life having the effect of deterrence as well.
5. The appeal on the present record be prepared and set down for hearing at an early date. M.H./G-2/SC Leave granted.