1994 P Cr (PLP)

Art. 4

Appreciation of evidence

Investigating Officer had raided the accused's premises for making recovery of narcotic, but did not associate two respectable citizens of the locality with the search proceedings and, thus, he had not only flagrantly violated the provisions of S.103, Cr.P.C., but his action was also illegal and contrary to law

Whole affair of recovery of heroin from the house of accused had become most doubtful in circumstances

Accused was acquitted accordingly. G.N. Gohar and Ashraf Azeem for Appellant. Muhammad Gulzar Lashari for the State. Date of hearing: 2nd August, 1993. NAZIR AHMAD BHATTI, J: -- Appellant Mst. Aasia was already under police custody on 14-1-1991 in a case of F.I.R. No. 10/91 registered on 11-1-1991 for offence under Articles 3 and 4 of the Prohibition (Enforcement of Hadd) Order, 1979 when she disclosed to Nazir Ahmad Inspector/S.H.O. City Police Station Ahmedpur East that she had concealed heroin in the cooler inside her house which she could get recovered. Thereupon, the said S.H.O. arranged a raiding party and raided the house of the appellant and recovered an envelope from the cooler from her house which contained 15 grams of heroin. The S.H.O. separated one gram from the bulk powder for chemical analysis and made two separate parcels. He also sent written complaint to Police Station City Ahmedpur East where F.I.R. No.25 was recorded on 14-1-1991.

2. After investigation the appellant was sent up for trial Wore the Additional Sessions Judge, Bahawalpur who charged her under Article 4 of the Prohibition Order to which she pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.

3. After conclusion of the trial the learned Additional Sessions Judge convicted the appellant under Article 4 of the Prohibition Order and sentenced her to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 2 years, to suffer 5 stripes and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000 or in default to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for 3 months. The appellant has challenged her conviction and sentence by the appeal in hand

4. We have thoroughly perused record of the case. The S.H.O./Investigation Officer had raided the premises of the appellant for allegedly making the recovery of narcotic from her house but he did not associate two respectable citizens of the locality for making the said search. The Investigating Officer not only flagrantly violated the provisions of section 103, Cr.P.C. in carrying out the said search but his action was also illegal and contrary to law. The whole affair of recovery of any narcotic from the house of the appellant had become most doubtful. Consequently the appeal is accepted. The conviction and sentence of the appellant recorded on 16-5-1993 by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Bahwalpur are set aside and she is acquitted of the offence for which she was convicted and sentenced. She is on bail. Her bail bond stands discharged. N.H.Q./844/FSC Appeal accepted.