2006 P Cr (PLP)

MIAN MUHAMMAD NAJAM-UZ-ZAMAN, J.

Appellant Sanaullah son of Lashkar Ali along with his co-accused Tauqeer Hussain Shah son of Qalandar Hussain Shah was tried in case F.I.R. No.102 dated 4-10-2002 registered under section 9(b) of Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997 at Police Station Noorpur Thal by the Additional Sessions Judge, Khushab, who vide judgment, dated 28-6-2004 convicted the appellant under section 9(b) of the (ibid) Act and sentenced him to undergo two and a half years and to pay a fine of Rs.10,000 or in default whereof to further undergo two months' R.I.

2. Calling in question the impugned judgment the appellant filed the instant appeal.

3. Succinctly the prosecution story as narrated in the F.I.R. is that on 4-10-2002 at 2-00 p.m. complainant Muhammad Shameer S.-I. along with other police officials was present at Bus Stand Rangpur when Sana Ullah appellant informed that Nazar Muhammad dealt in narcotics and he could made purchase from him. Complainant directed him to purchase the substance from the said Nazar Muhammad and also directed Pervaiz Iqbal Constable to follow him in plain clothes. At about 2-30 p.m. Sana Ullah returned with one bottle of liquor. Pervaiz Iqbal constable also came back and told that appellant had not purchased that liquor from anyone rather he had concealed it in Koondar near village Rangpur and had brought out the same from there. He further told that he want to falsely involve Nazar Muhammad due to his personal enmity. The appellant was interrogated who admitted his enmity with Nazar Muhammad and concealment of four kepis of liquor and some Charas which were purchased from one Ghulam Abbas to get Nazar Muhammad arrested. Hence he was apprehended and on his disclosure four bottles of local liquor from ventilator and Charas weighing 600 grams from an iron box were recovered from the house of Nazar Muhammad and present case was registered against him.

4. After complying with all the legal formalities the Investigating Officer submitted challan before the trial Court where the prosecution produced eight witnesses to prove the charge against the appellant.

5. The trial Court also examined the appellant and his co-accused under section 342, Cr.P.C. While answering to the question why this case against you and why the P.Ws. have deposed against you? The appellant replied as under:

"I am in fact working as police informer and never gave false information to the police. I was working with Ghulam Shabbir A.S.-I. as informer. Muhammad Shammer S.-I. was annoyed with me for not rendering information or crime to him and he made this false case against me which was finally investigated by Shafqat Ullah, D.S.P. and it came to surface that I have no concern with the Charas or liquor, case property of the case." The appellant neither made any statement under section 340(2), Cr.P.C. nor produce any evidence in defiance.

6. The trial Court after appraisal of evidence available on record, vide judgment, dated 28-6-2004, convicted the appellant as narrated earlier.

7. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant has been falsely involved in this case because at one stage during the investigation appellant was found innocent; the witnesses who had deposed against him were not trustworthy; the appellant was informer who disclosed about the availability of narcotics and liquor in the house of one Nazar Muhammad but with mala fide intention the Investigating Agency involved the appellant in this case as an accused. Conversely, learned counsel for the State while supporting the impugned judgment, vehemently opposed the arguments raised by learned counsel for the appellant.

8. Heard. File perused.

9. The bare perusal of the F.I.R. and the evidence of prosecution witnesses reveal that appellant had made a plan to falsely involve one Nazar Muhammad in the case of narcotics. He himself concealed 600 grams of Charas and four Kepis of local made liquor in the house of said Nazar Muhammad and later on got the same recovered in the presence of prosecution witnesses. Before the trial Court Muhammad Pervaiz F.C. P.W.7 and Nazar Hussain P.W.6 appeared as witnesses of recovery and while supporting the prosecution case narrated the circumstances under which the narcotics substance was recovered at the instance of appellant. Both the witnesses were subjected to lengthy and searching cross-examination and we have observed that there is nothing on the record to doubt the credibility of these witnesses. The statements of these witnesses are persuasive in nature and in our view the same can be relied upon to uphold the conviction of the appellant.

10. As for quantum of sentence of the appellant is concerned, we have observed that the quantity of Charas recovered from him is only 600 grams, he is facing the agony of the case since 2002 and according to the record he has already undergone about one and half years of his sentence. In this view of the matter, in our opinion lenient view about the quantum of sentence would meet the ends of justice. Accordingly, while dismissing the appeal the sentence of imprisonment of the appellant is reduced to the period already undergone by him and fine is also reduced to Rs.5,000 or in default of payment of fine appellant shall further undergo six months' R.I. H.B.T./S-442/L Order accordingly.