SCMR 2007

2007 PLP 1435 (SCMR)

WAJID KHAN — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent

Jurisdiction / Court
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Decided Date
Jail Petition No.54 of 2005, decided on 10th April, 2007.
Honorable Judges
Faqir Muhammad Khokhar, Syed Jamshed Ali and Ghulam Rabbani, JJ
Case Reference Summary (AEO Optimized)
Citation 2007 PLP 1435 (SCMR)
Forum / Court Supreme Court of Pakistan
Bench Members Faqir Muhammad Khokhar, Syed Jamshed Ali and Ghulam Rabbani, JJ
Parties WAJID KHAN — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent
Primary Law 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 2007 PLP 1435 (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 2007 PLP 1435 (SCMR)?

The case was heard and decided by the Supreme Court of Pakistan bench comprising: Faqir Muhammad Khokhar, Syed Jamshed Ali and Ghulam Rabbani, JJ.

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

Cite this legal precedent as: 2007 PLP 1435 (SCMR) (WAJID KHAN — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.

Laws Cited

Control of Narcotic Substances Act (XXV of 1997)

Representation

  • Sardar M. Sadiq Khan, Advocate-General, N.-W.F.P., Peshawar for Petitioner.
  • M. Zaman Bhatti, Advocate Supreme Court for the State.

Headnotes / Summary

(Against the judgment, dated 22-12-2004 passed by Peshawar High Court, Peshawar in Criminal Appeal No.773 of 2003).

S. 9(c)

Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art.185(3)

Recovery of 189 kilograms Charas and 12 kilogram opium from accused was duly proved by the prosecution

Each packet of Charas and opium weighing one kilogram, provisions of S.9(c) of the Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997, were fully attracted-Prosecution evidence was properly considered by the Courts below in juxtaposition with the plea taken by accused

No reason for false involvement of accused existed despite some concessions made by a prosecution witness

Impugned judgment did not suffer from any legal infirmity so as to warrant interference by Supreme Court

Leave to appeal was refused to accused in circumstances. M. Zaman Bhatti, Advocate Supreme Court for the State.

Judgment & Decree

FAQIR MUHAMMAD KHOKHAR, J.

P.W.4, Rehan Gul, Inspector, Customs Intelligence intercepted, on 23-2-2001, a Toyota Pick-up No.DR-2298 near Khairabad on the G.T. Road. The petitioner and Ali Rehman were found in the Pick-up. From the secret cavities of the Pick-up 189 kilograms of Charas and 12 kilograms of opium were recovered. The case F.I.R. No.8, dated 23-2-2001 was registered at Police Station Investigation and Prosecution Branch, Customs Department, Peshawar. The petitioner and his co-accused Ali Rehman were tried by the Sessions Judge/Judge Special Court, Nowshera who convicted them under section 9(c) of the Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997 vide judgment, dated 23-10-2003. Both of them were sentenced to life imprisonment with a fine of Rs.10,00,000 (one million) each or in default to further undergo imprisonment for five years. Benefit of section 382-B, Cr.P.C. was extended to them. They filed Criminal Appeal No.773 of 2003 which was dismissed by a learned Division Bench of the 'Peshawar High Court vide the impugned judgment, dated 22-12-2004.

2. The learned counsel argued that the trial Court as well as High Court had failed to take into consideration the statement of Sanaullah Khan, Inspector, P.W.2 in its proper perspective who categorically stated that the packets of opium were not properly sealed. He further argued that the prosecution had failed to prove its case against the petitioner beyond any reasonable doubt.

36. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the State argued that no enmity of the P.Ws. was shown with that of the petitioner or his co-accused Ali Rehman and that the recovery of huge quantity of narcotics was fully established by the prosecution.

4. We have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the State and have also perused the available record.

5. We find that the recovery of 189 kilograms Charas and 12 kilograms opium was duly proved by the prosecution. The High Court as well as the trial Court properly considered the prosecution evidence in juxtaposition with the plea taken by the petitioner. The case of the prosecution was not shown to be suffering from any noticeable defect. There was no reason for false involvement of the petitioner despite some concessions made by P.W.2 Sanaullah Khan. The impugned judgment of the High Court does not suffer from any legal infirmity so as to warrant interference by this Court. Needless to observe that each packet of Charas and opium weighed 1 kilogram. Therefore, the provisions of section 9(c) of the Act were fully attracted.

6. For the foregoing reasons, we do not find any merit in this petition which is dismissed and leave to appeal is refused. N.H.Q./W-1/SC Leave refused.