SCMR 2020

2020 PLP 460 (SCMR)

SHAZIA BIBI — Petitioner Versus The STATE — Respondent

Jurisdiction / Court
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Decided Date
Jail Petition No. 847 of 2018, decided on 8th January, 2020.
Honorable Judges
Manzoor Ahmad Malik and Qazi Muhammad Amin Ahmed, JJ
Case Reference Summary (AEO Optimized)
Citation 2020 PLP 460 (SCMR)
Forum / Court Supreme Court of Pakistan
Bench Members Manzoor Ahmad Malik and Qazi Muhammad Amin Ahmed, JJ
Parties SHAZIA BIBI — Petitioner Versus The STATE — Respondent
Primary Law (b) Control of Narcotic Substances (Government Analysts) Rules, 2001, (a) Control of Narcotic Substances Act (XXV of 1997)
💡 Quick Legal QA & Summary / سوال و جواب خلاصہ
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2020 PLP 460 (SCMR)?

This judgment primarily cites: (b) Control of Narcotic Substances (Government Analysts) Rules, 2001, (a) Control of Narcotic Substances Act (XXV of 1997) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.

Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2020 PLP 460 (SCMR)?

The case was heard and decided by the Supreme Court of Pakistan bench comprising: Manzoor Ahmad Malik and Qazi Muhammad Amin Ahmed, JJ.

Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?

Cite this legal precedent as: 2020 PLP 460 (SCMR) (SHAZIA BIBI — Petitioner Versus The STATE — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.

Laws Cited

(b) Control of Narcotic Substances (Government Analysts) Rules, 2001 (a) Control of Narcotic Substances Act (XXV of 1997)

Representation

  • Malik Jawwad Khalid, Advocate Supreme Court for Petitioner.

Headnotes / Summary

(Against judgment dated 15.11.2018 of the Lahore High Court, Rawalpindi Bench passed in Criminal Appeal No. 539 of 2017)

S. 9(c)

Possession of four kilograms of cannabis

Reappraisal of evidence

Accused lady was apprehended from within a public vehicle and found in possession of 4 kgs. of cannabis

Plea of accused that she had been targeted as a scapegoat by the police, who had enmity with her husband

Held, that quantity recovered from accused was substantial in volume/weight, which could not possibly be foisted upon a female to victimize her husband, who himself was the most suitable target, if at all the police had an axe to grind against him

Evidence of all the prosecution witnesses including those of recovery was in tune with one another

Soon after her arrest, the accused was produced before a Magistrate who remitted her into judicial custody, but the accused did not raise any protest at such opportune occasion, and her silence went a long way to rebut the belatedly related story that otherwise may not be plausible

Conviction of accused under S. 9(c) of Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997 and resultant sentence of four years' imprisonment with fine of Rs. 20,000 was upheld

Petition for leave to appeal was dismissed.

R. 6

Control of Narcotic Substances Act (XXV of 1997), S. 9(c)

Possession of narcotics

Report of Government Analyst

Protocols/procedure

Scope

Substantial/sufficient compliance with R. 6 of the Control of Narcotic Substances (Government Analysts) Rules, 2001 ('Rule 6')

Plea on behalf of accused that forensic report in the present case did not mention the details of protocols used, as such the nature of contraband was never established

Held, that tests carried out by the analyst were vividly mentioned in his report, under the heading "Test Performed on Received Item(s) of Evidence" followed by the heading "Results and Conclusions"

Said details in the forensic report substantially/sufficiently qualified to meet the statutory requirements under R. 6 of Control of Narcotic Substances (Government Analysts) Rules, 2001

Conviction of accused under S. 9(c) of Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997 was maintained

Petition for leave to appeal was dismissed. Muhammad Jaffar, Additional Prosecutor-General Punjab for the State.

Judgment & Decree

QAZI MUHAMMAD AMIN AHMED, J.

Shazia Bibi, petitioner herein, was apprehended with 4-kilograms of cannabis during a random search on 28.12.2016 by a police contingent of Attock Khurd; she was on board a public vehicle hailing from Peshawar; forensic report established narcotic character of the contraband; upon conclusion of trial, convicted under section 9(c) of the Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997, she was sentenced to four years' rigorous imprisonment with a direction to pay Rs.20,000/- as fine or to undergo four months' simple imprisonment in lieu thereof, vide judgment dated 23.2.2017, upheld in appeal vide impugned judgment dated 15.11.2018, vires whereof, are being assailed on the grounds that she has been targeted as a scapegoat by the police to settle score with her husband, a driver by profession, on loggerheads with the police over illegal demands. It is next argued that the case was liable to be thrown out for prosecution's failure to come up with complete details/protocol of forensic tests, carried out to establish the nature of contraband allegedly recovered. Learned Law Officer faithfully defended the impugned judgment.

2. Heard. Record perused.

3. Quantity recovered, rather substantial in volume/weight, cannot be possibly foisted upon a female to victimize her husband, himself a most suitable target, if at all the police had an axe to grind. All the prosecution witnesses including those of recovery have been found by us well within tune with one another; soon after her arrest, with the assistance of a female staffer, she was produced before a Magistrate who remitted her into judicial custody, a most opportune occasion to raise protest; her silence goes a long way to rebut the belatedly related story that otherwise may not find a buyer. Argument that the forensic report sans protocol is beside the mark as well inasmuch as tests carried out by the analyst are vividly mentioned therein, reproduced for the convenience of reference:- "Test Performed on Received Item(s) of Evidence

1. Top load balance was used for weighing.

2. Chemical Spot Tests were used for Presumptive Testing.

3. Gas Chromatography-Mass Spectrometry was used for confirmation. Results and Conclusions Item # 01 3982 gram(s) of dark brown resinous material in sealed parcel contains Charas." Above details mentioned in the forensic report substantially/sufficiently qualify to meet the statutory requirements. Findings concurrently arrived by the Courts below, being well within the remit of law, do not call for interference. Petition fails. Leave declined. MWA/S-3/SC Petition dismissed.