2018 P Cr (PLP)

AFTAB AHMED GORAR, J.

This appeal filed under section 410, Cr.P.C. read with section 48 of the Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997, is directed against the judgment dated 11.07.2012 passed by the learned Special Judge-II (CNS) Karachi in Spl. Case No.324 of 2010 arising out of FIR No. 01/2010 under section 9(c), Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997 registered with Police Station Customs, Karachi whereby the appellant was convicted and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and fine of Rs.10,00,000/-, in default whereof to suffer five years rigorous imprisonment more, the benefit of section 382-B, Cr.P.C. was also extended to the appellant.

2. The prosecution case as gleaned from the FIR is that on receiving information that a huge quantity of narcotics is likely to be smuggled from Pakistan to European countries, a team was constituted and on surveillance from container No. GLDU-387845-4, declared to be containing 650 bags weighing 26 metric ton of soap stones to be exported by M/s. Inayat Traders Pakistan for M/s. New Country Trade SL Spain, was checked thoroughly; some bags were containing natural soap stones and some bags with oval shape wrapped in adhesive tapes were containing heroin powder. There were 12 bags containing heroin powder weighing 90 Kgs and FIR was registered against the appellant.

3. After completion of investigation, formal challan was put against the accused in Court where he was formally charge sheeted but he did not plead guilty. Therefore, the prosecution in order to prove its case against the accused produced PW-1 Khalid Mehmood Seizing Officer, complainant, PW-2 Abdul Rahim Khan, PW-3 Azhar Mehdi Investigating Officer, PW-4 Muhammad Adnan. Thereafter side of prosecution was closed and statement of accused under section 342, Cr.P.C. was recorded in which he professed his innocence however he did not opt to examine oath nor produce any witness in his defence. The learned trial Judge after evaluating the evidence brought on record and hearing the parties found the accused guilty of the offence and convicted and sentenced him as stated above. Hence this appeal.

4. Learned counsel for the appellant contended that the impugned conviction is against facts, law and thus not sustainable; that the learned trial Judge has ignored the mandatory provisions of the CNS Act 1997. Learned counsel for the appellant while reiterating the grounds mentioned in the memo of appeal added that the punishment awarded to the appellant is very harsh and appellant deserves leniency.

5. The learned Special Prosecutor customs defended the impugned judgment of conviction of the appellant on the grounds that the prosecution had successfully proved its case against the convict; that there was no animosity between the appellant and the PWs to falsely rope him in the offence; that a huge quantity of contraband heroin was recovered and that the appellant dealing in the heinous business of narcotics which is destroying the whole humanity deserves no leniency.

6. We have taken into consideration the arguments advanced by both the parties and carefully gone through entire record of the case.

7. The globalization of drug abuse has become one of the gravest problems confronting humanity. The world, at large, has waged an admirable war against drugs. Many developed and developing countries have achieved remarkable results by making huge investments to check narcotics trafficking while simultaneously reducing the in-house demand for illicit substance. It may be advantageous to mention here that the Control of Narcotics Substance Act, 1997 consolidates and amends the law relating to narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances. It controls and prohibits the prosecution, processing and trafficking of these substances. It also lays progressive punishments for narcotic offences. It provides for the constitution of Special Courts having exclusive jurisdiction to try narcotic offences. Section 9 of C.N.S. Act, 1997 provides as under:- "

9. Punishment for contravention of sections 6, 7 and 8 Whoever contravenes the provisions of sections 6, 7 or 8 shall be punishable with:- (a) imprisonment which may extend to two years, or with fine, or with both, if the quantity of the narcotic drug, psychotropic substance or controlled substance is one hundred grams or less; (b) imprisonment which may extend to seven years and shall also be liable to fine, if the quantity of the narcotic drug, psychotropic substance or controlled substance exceeds one hundred grams but does not exceed one kilogram; (c) death or imprisonment for life or imprisonment for a term which may extend to fourteen years and shall also be liable to fine which may be up to one million rupees, if the quantity of narcotic drug, psychotropic substance or controlled substance exceeds the limits specified in clause (b): Provided that if the quantity exceeds ten kilograms the punishment shall not be less than imprisonment for life."

8. Admittedly, in the present case huge quantity, i.e. (90) ninety kilograms heroin powder, was recovered, which was being exported by the appellant, thus the quantity of narcotics exceeds ten kilograms and case falls in Clause (c) of section 9 of the Act, for which death penalty or imprisonment for life has been provided. Albeit, in Control of Narcotic Substances Act heroin has not been separated from other narcotics, keeping in view its severe impact on human body as it causes many short-term and long-term effects on the human body. It may cause damage to various organs, including the heart, lungs, liver and kidneys. It can also cause breathing problems, collapsed veins, infectious diseases and even death. Same punishment has been provided for heroin as provided for other narcotic drug under section 9, Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997, but during present times unfortunately crimes of terrorism, abduction for ransom, murder and attempt to murder and many other are increasing tremendously and we are also mindful of increase of detestable business of heroin which has ruined the lives of the innocent people particularly the youth who was future builders of the nation. We have observed the addicts of heroin lying in streets and footpath adding more to the agonies of their poor parents, who are already grinding in poverty. Such addicts usually indulge in crimes of theft and even do not hesitate to steal the jewellery and house hold articles of their own house and houses of their kith and kin. They instead of adding in the economy of their families, become unnecessary burden for their parents and family members, therefore, impact of heroin is more serious as compared to other narcotics, therefore, the offenders dealing in the despicable business of heroin, who are enemies of the entire nation are required to be dealt with an iron hand. No enmity, ill-will or grudge has been alleged against the prosecution witnesses; on the contrary, sufficient material has brought by the prosecution on the record including report of Chemical Examiner relating to positive report of narcotic substance. The appellant had failed to bring anything on record that he had falsely been roped in the offence because of any rivalry with the official witnesses. It is not out of context to mention here that such activities are giving the country bad reputation in the international community of nations.

9. From the facts and circumstances of the case, the prosecution had successfully proved its case against the convict/appellant. Learned trial Judge after thoroughly examining the material and relying upon the case laws, in its elaborate, well-reasoned judgment arrived at the conclusion that prosecution has proved the case against appellant and convicted him. There is hardly any improbability or infirmity in the impugned judgment recorded by the learned trial court, which being based on sound and cogent reasons does not warrant any interference by this Court and is accordingly maintained.

10. By a short order dated 24.04.2018 the instant appeal was dismissed and above are the reasons for the said short order. JK/J-21/Sindh Appeal dismissed.