2006 PLP 1826 (SCMR)
AZIZ-UR-REHMAN — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent
| Citation | 2006 PLP 1826 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | Supreme Court of Pakistan |
| Bench Members | Sardar Muhammad Raza Khan and M. Javed Buttar, JJ |
| Parties | AZIZ-UR-REHMAN — Petitioner 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 1826 (SCMR)?
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 1826 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Supreme Court of Pakistan bench comprising: Sardar Muhammad Raza Khan and M. Javed Buttar, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2006 PLP 1826 (SCMR) (AZIZ-UR-REHMAN — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Hafiz S.A. Rehman, Advocate Supreme Court for Petitioner.
- Date of hearing: 6th April, 2006.
- M. Zaman Bhatti, Advocate Supreme Court for the State.
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from the judgment, dated 25-7-2005 passed by the Lahore High Court, Rawalpindi Bench, Rawalpindi in Narcotics Appeal No.281 of 2003).
S. 9(c)
Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art.185(3)
Plea though plausible but not supported by evidence
Allegation against accused was that Charas weighing 30 Kgs. was recovered from the dashboard 'of car in which accused was travelling along with owner of car
Accused took plea that he was sitting in car as a servant of owner of car who(owner) was himself driving car and that accused was involved as scapegoat
Trial Court convicted and sentenced accused to imprisonment for life
High Court upheld the finding of Trial Court
Plea of accused was of considerable importance/and could be preferred to prosecution version provided the same was supported by evidence
Except denied suggestion there was no material on record to accept plea of accused
No ground was shown to interfere with sentence passed on accused
Petition for leave to appeal was dismissed. M. Zaman Bhatti, Advocate Supreme Court for the State.
Judgment & Decree
SARDAR MUHAMMAD RAZA KHAN, J.
Aziz-ur-Rehman, while driving a Motorcar No.IDJ-3969 was checked within the limits of village Bara Zai, Police Station Hazro, District Attock and apprehended under section 9(c) of the Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997 for the recovery of 30 kilograms of contraband Charas found in the dashboard.
2. He was tried by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Attock and sentenced to imprisonment for life with a line of Rs.50,000, in default of payment to undergo simple imprisonment for two years. He went in appeal, heard by a learned Division Bench of Lahore High Court, Rawalpindi Bench. Vide judgment, dated 25-7-2005, the learned Appellate Court upheld the conviction as well as the sentence and hence this jail petition, seeking leave to appeal.
3. The recovery of 30 kilograms of Charas on the spot is proved through the recovery officer as well as the witnesses to the recovery. This is further supported by his physical arrest on the spot along with Motorcar No.IDJ-3969. The report of Chemical Examiner is in positive and hence, we do not find any reason to differ with the two Courts in succession.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner came up with the only plea that the petitioner was sitting in' the car not as a driver but as a servant of the owner Gul Muhammad who, in turn, was driving the car. That, the police took him to a roadside hotel, had some negotiation, whereafter, he was let off and the petitioner was involved as a scapegoat.
5. We have carefully gone through the evidence on record in order to appreciate the plea taken by the accused. No doubt the plea taken by an accused carries considerable importance and can even be preferred to the prosecution version provided it is supported by the evidence. Except for denied suggestions, there is no material on record for us to accept the plea taken.
6. The accused has also produced evidence where the defence witnesses have said that they had seen the car in question at Attock Bridge and that the same was being driven by Gul Muhammad, the owner. We cannot avoid taking judicial notice of the fact that a car, if seen at Attock Bridge on G.T. Road heading towards Rawalpindi etcetera, should not ordinarily be apprehended on the spot where it was so apprehended because that spot is located altogether on a different road which leads from Ghazi/Turbaila Dam and touches G.T. Road at Lawrencepur. We are convinced that the accused had been coming from Ghazi/Turbaila in order to avoid checkpoints at G.T. Road. The defence version is not at all reasonable or plausible.
7. Keeping in view the quantity involved, we see no chances of even interfering into the sentence. The petition being meritless, it is hereby dismissed and leave to appeal refused. S.M.B./A-46/SC Petition dismissed.