2003 PLP (Trib (PTD)

CRIME BRANCH, LAHORE No. 33/FSL 5‑1‑2002: Note. (i) This opinion is being issued without any cutting/erasers. (ii) Any report without embossing mark is not genuine. Subject: EXAMINATION OF THE CHASSIS NUMBER OF TOYOTA LAND CRUISER REGISTRATION NO.BC -2465. Office of the Assistant Director, Intelligence, Customs Excise and Sales Tax, Gujranwala. Number Before Examination, Chassis Number HDJ81‑00051181 The chemical treatment of the chassis number of Toyota Land Cruiser Regd. No.BC‑2465 in the case cited as subject has revealed that the digits 7,3,0 have become visible on the digits 1,8,1, respectively of the chassis number i.e. HDJ81‑0005181. Newly visible, digits appear to have been engraved superficially in a sub‑standard manner and as such not genuine. (Sd.) Muhammad Altaf, S.I Examiner of FSL, Lahore Ref. Your No.686, dated 10‑12‑2001 The opinion of the expert is forwarded Please Ack. receipt. (Sd.) ASSISTANT DIRECTOR, FORENSIC SCIENCE LABORATORY PUNJAB, LAHORE. SALEEM GUL, Asst. Director, Customs Excise and Sales Tax, Gujranwala.

4. The learned counsel for the appellant on 7‑2‑2002 submitted an application requesting for summoning the expert Mr. Muhammad Altaf S.I. for examination in order to clarify some ambiguities in the report.

5. Muhammad Altaf, S.‑I. Examiner of Forensic Science Laboratory, Lahore recorded his statement on 26‑2‑2002 and proved his report Ex.C‑1, his signature Exh.Cl/1, and photographs Exh.C/2, C/3 C/4 and C/5. The statement is as under:‑‑ "STATEMENT OF MR. MUHAMMAD ALTAF, S.I. FORENSIC SCIENCE LABORATORY ON OATH I have seen report, dated 5‑1‑2002, which bears my signatures. The report is Exh.Cl and my signatures are Exh.Cl/1. To, I am working in the Police department for the last 19 years. I am matriculate. I did my matriculation in 1970. I am a diploma holder from the Lahore Forensic Science Laboratory. This diploma has not been issued by any Technical Board. The vehicle No.BC‑2465 Toyota Land Cruiser was received in the laboratory on 13‑12‑2001. The vehicle was returned on the same day after its examination. According to my report, the digits 181 and the other digits 730 were both tampered. No other digits except the aforementioned were available on the chassis frame. By substandard I mean that their alignment was not proper and their spacing was also not proper: The chassis number of the vehicle, is HDJ81‑0005181 and out of these digits, the last three digits 181 and the digits which appeared under 181 (730) are not genuine whereas the remaining earlier digits are genuine. Photographic enlargements of the digit number are Exh.C2, C3, C4 and C

5. I examined the vehicle under supervision of the Assistant Director who forwarded the report. By. Imran Tariq, D.R. The genuine chassis number of the vehicle is DHJ81‑0005181. Some one tried to change the last three digits which are

181. The attempt was to change 1 into 7, 8 into 3 and 1 into 0, but the attempt was not successful and as a result of this attempt the 1st three digits 181 and the attempted digits 730 were tampered. R. O. A. C."

6. The learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the appellant had purchased this vehicle as third or fourth purchaser in the series, that the vehicle was earlier detained on 30‑11‑1999 for verification of import documents and that after verification from Karachi Customs House the vehicle was released under order, dated 21‑12‑1999 passed by the then learned Additional Collector, Customs Lahore (Annexure‑E) (2‑leaves), the vehicle was snatched on pistol point on 14‑3‑1995; in respect of which a criminal case under section 382, P.P.C. was got registered at Police Station, Iqbal Town, Lahore vide F.I.R. No.128 of 1995 the vehicle was recovered by C.I.A. on 13‑7‑1995 and was handed over to Mian Irshad by the learned Ilaqa Magistrate CIA; that the dacoits may have played. some mischief with the chassis number by attempting to alter the last three digits to read as 730 instead of 181 during the period from 14‑3‑1995 to 13‑7‑1995, the vehicle remained with them and that the report Exh.C‑1 read with statement of Muhammad Altaf, S:I. Examiner of Forensic Laboratory when considered in the light of the photographs, Exh.C/2 to C/5 proved that the original chassis number of HDJ81‑0005181 was the genuine number which the vehicle carries even now. Regarding reports from Islamabad and Peshawar Laboratories, it was urged that these reports were not per se admissible in evidence and the prosecution did not examine the experts to prove these repots. He requested for setting aside the impugned order and for release of the confiscated vehicle without any conditions.

7. Contesting the appeal, the learned D.R. and Mr. Nazir Ahmad Sahi, Inspector seriously urged for upholding the order of confiscation on the basis of the reports, dated 18‑5‑2001 and 3‑8‑2001 from the Islamabad Laboratory and Peshawar Laboratory respectively.

8. We have considered the arguments and have examined the record.

9. The case of the prosecution hinges on the two reports by the Islamabad and Peshawar Laboratories which are not per se admissible in evidence and no attempt has been made to prove these reports by examining the experts who examined the vehicle and prepared the reports and these reports thus cannot form the basis for determining the import status of the vehicle which fact has already been verified from Karachi Customs House and on the basis of said verification, the vehicle was earlier released on 21‑12‑1999 under order of the then learned Additional Collector.

10. It is an admitted fact between the parties that vehicle bearing chassis No.HDJ81‑0005181 was legally imported in the country.

11. The prosecution claims that the confiscated vehicle was not the one which was imported under the above‑mentioned chassis number but in fact was another vehicle with chassis No.HDJ81‑0005730 and this fact was evident from the two reports one by Islamabad Laboratory and the other by Peshawar Laboratory according to which this was the chassis number which was found to have emerged after chemical treatment which was found to have been tampered.

12. The learned D.R. and Mr. Nazir Ahmad Sahi, Inspector, however, did not advance any cogent reason for discarding the report by the Lahore Laboratory, statement of expert recorded by the Tribunal and the photographic enlargements Exh.C/2 to C/5.

13. We have carefully examined all the three reports in the light of the photographic enlargements produced by Mr. Muhammad Altaf, S.I. The first two reports relied upon by the prosecution simply state the chassis number before chemical treatment and after chemical treatment as HDJ81‑0005181 and HDJ81‑0605730. These reports also say that chassis number of the confiscated vehicle has been found tampered after chemical treatment. As against these reports, the report by the Forensic Science Laboratory, Lahore carries an opinion which stands to reason and offers an explanation in respect of an attempted tampering of the last three digits of the chassis number 181 to 730 and the statement of Muhammad Altaf, S. L, the expert further clarifies it when he in reply to a question by the learned D.R. in cross‑examination stated that the genuine chassis number of the vehicle is HDJ81‑0005181 and that someone tried to change the last three digits. The witness further stated that the attempt was made to change figure 1 into 7, 8 into 3 and 1 into 0 but the attempt was not successful and as a result of this attempt the last three digits 181 and the attempted digits 730 were tampered. The enlargements further clarify the position Exh.C/2 is photographic enlargement of the chassis number before chemical treatment, whereas the remaining enlargements Exhs. C/3, C/4 and C/5 are the photographic enlargements of chassis number after chemical treatment. A minute and close examination of these enlargements show that under figure 1 figure 7 is available, under figure 8 figure 3 seems to emerge and under the last digit 1 figure 0 appeals. The Expert from Lahore Laboratory has thus explained in his statement recorded before the Tribunal that the last three figure 181 of the chassis number are part of the genuine chassis number whereas the last three figures , 730 are not part of the genuine chassis number.

14. We find that the statement of the Expert has clarified that position beyond any shadow of doubt and we have no reason to discard his statement, the photographic enlargements and his report.

15. Having considered all aspects of the case, we have arrived a the conclusion that the confiscated vehicle bears genuine chassis number HDJ81‑0005181 and is a legally imported vehicle, its import documents have already been verified from the Karachi Customs House and that the unidentified dacoits who snatched the vehicle on pistol‑point may have made an unsuccessful attempt to tamper the last three digits 181 into 730, during the period the vehicle remained in their possession.

16. The result of the above discussion is that the impugned order is set aside, the appeal is accepted and the confiscated vehicle is directed to be released to its lawful owner without any conditions. C.M.A./744/Tax (Trib.) Appeal Accepted.