2011 PLP 984 (SCMR)
GUL BADSHAH — Appellant Versus THE STATE — Respondent
| Citation | 2011 PLP 984 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | Supreme Court of Pakistan |
| Bench Members | Mian Shakirullah Jan, Mahmood Akhtar Shahid Siddiqui and Mian Saqib Nisar, JJ |
| Parties | GUL BADSHAH — Appellant Versus THE STATE — Respondent |
| Primary Law | (b) Control of Narcotic Substances Act (XXXV of 1997), (a) Control of Narcotic Substances Act (XXV of 1997) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2011 PLP 984 (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: (b) Control of Narcotic Substances Act (XXXV of 1997), (a) Control of Narcotic Substances Act (XXV of 1997) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2011 PLP 984 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Supreme Court of Pakistan bench comprising: Mian Shakirullah Jan, Mahmood Akhtar Shahid Siddiqui and Mian Saqib Nisar, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2011 PLP 984 (SCMR) (GUL BADSHAH — Appellant 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 Appellant.
- Date of hearing: 20th July, 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 of 2006 and Criminal Appeal No. 135 of 2006).
S. 9(c)
Constitution of Pakistan, Art. 185(3)
Transporting narcotic drugs
Leave to appeal was granted to accused only on the question of quantum of sentence being appropriate punishment awarded to him or that he could have been punished to imprisonment for life having the effect of deterrence as well.
S. 9(c)
Transporting narcotic drugs
Sentence, reduction in
Huge quantity of narcotics had been recovered from secret cavities of the truck loaded with bricks being driven by the accused
Concurrent finding of the two courts below holding the accused guilty was affirmed
However, the fact that the illicit substance was concealed in the secret cavities of the vehicle had suggested that the accused might not be aware in this regard, which could be considered as a mitigating circumstance in his favour--Conviction of accused was consequently maintained, but his sentence was reduced from death to imprisonment for life, without the benefit of S.382-B, Cr. P. C. Sahibzada and another v. The State 1991 SCMR 895; Nur Hussain v. The State 1993 SCMR 1608 and Zahoor Ahmad Awan v. The State 1997 SCMR 543 rel. Shahid Mehmood Abbasi, D.P.-G., Punjab for the State.
Judgment & Decree
MIAN SAQIB NISAR, J.
A huge quantity i.e., 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 appellant from the secret cavities of the vehicle. The appellant after the trial was found guilty and was sentenced to death with a further direction to pay Rs. 100,000 as fine or in default to undergo RI for one year; his conviction and sentence has been maintained by the High Court in the appeal. Leave in this case was granted on 11-5-2010 to consider the submission of the appellant's counsel that he (the appellant) had no knowledge of the illicit substances, being there in the secret cavities of the vehicle, as he was only the truck loader therefore this court in the said order observed, "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".
2. Though counsel for the appellant has argued the case on merits as well and we have also to an extent examined the record, but do not find that the judgments recorded by the two courts below against the appellant, holding him guilty of the offence are infirm for any legal or factual reasons. However in view of the fact that the illicit substance was found concealed in the secret cavities thus ruled out that the appellant was not aware in this regard, thus while considering it to be a mitigating circumstance and keeping in view the ratio of law laid down as Sahibzada and another v. The State (1991 SCMR 895), Nur Hussain v. The State (1993 SCMR 1608) and Zahoor Ahmad Await v. The State (1997 SCMR 543), we by maintaining the conviction of the appellant are inclined to reduce his sentence from death to life imprisonment, but without giving him the benefit of section 382-B, Cr.P.C. besides the sentence of fine and the imprisonment in default thereto, is also maintained. This appeal is decided in terms of the above. N.H.Q./G-9/SC Sentence reduced.