2006 PLP 1863 (MLD)
TAJ MUHAMMAD alias TAJI — Appellant Versus THE STATE — Respondent
| Citation | 2006 PLP 1863 (MLD) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | TAJ MUHAMMAD alias TAJI — Appellant Versus THE STATE — Respondent |
| Primary Law | Control of Narcotic Substances Act (XXV of 1997) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2006 PLP 1863 (MLD)?
This judgment primarily cites: Control of Narcotic Substances Act (XXV of 1997) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2006 PLP 1863 (MLD)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: N/A.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2006 PLP 1863 (MLD) (TAJ MUHAMMAD alias TAJI — Appellant Versus THE STATE — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Headnotes / Summary
S. 9(c)
Sentence, reduction in
Counsel for accused was only asking for reduction in sentence, which would mean that he was not impeaching the credibility of witnesses, though they all were officials
Conviction of accused was upheld, but sentence was reduced from eight years to four years' R.I.
Fine was also reduced from Rs.50,000 to Rs.20,000
Accused would also be entitled to benefit under S.382-B, Cr.P.C.
Judgment & Decree
ALI NAWAZ CHOWHAN, J.
Taj Muhammad alias Taji appellant was convicted under section 9(c) of the Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997 by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sargodha vide judgment, dated 9-12-2005 in case F.I.R. No.389, dated 11-10-2004 registered at Police Station Sahiwal District Sargodha and sentence to 8 years' R.I. with a fine of Rs.50,000 or in lieu thereof to further undergo three months' S.-I, He was given the benefit under section 382-B, Cr.P.C.
2. Briefly the prosecution case is that curing raid 3000 grams of Charas along with scale, measurement weights, chhurree and Scissors were recovered from the Baitak of the appellant while he made good his escape.
3. To prove its case the prosecution examined as many as five witnesses. Muhammad Hayat P.W. deposed about the safe custody of sealed parcels said to contain Charas in the Malkhana of the Police Station. Nazar Muhammad, S.-I. P. W.2 and Mukhtar Ahmad, S.-I. P.W.3 are the recovery witnesses. Aziz Ullah P.W.4 transmitted the sealed parcel containing Charas to the office of Chemical Examiner. Nawab Hussain Dogar P.W.5 is the complainant and investigated the case.
4. The accused was examined under section 342, Cr.P.C. He denied all the allegations and recovery of Charas. He did not opt to appear as his own witness under section 340(2), Cr.P.C. but produced copy of order, dated 6-1-2005 as Exh. DA.
5. The learned counsel for the appellant is only asking for reduction in the sentence which means that he is not impeaching the credibility of the witnesses although they all are officials.
6. While we uphold the order of conviction we reduce the sentence from eight years to four years. The fine is also reduced from Rs.50,000 to Rs.20,000 or in lieu thereof to further undergo one month's S.-I. He shall be entitled to the benefit under section 382-B, Cr.P.C. The appeal is disposed of with the above modification in the sentence. H.B.T./T-27/L Sentence reduced.