P L D 2007 Supreme Court 85 (PLP)
THE STATE — Petitioner Versus AMJAD ALI — Respondent
| Citation | P L D 2007 Supreme Court 85 (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | High Court |
| Bench Members | Khalil-ur-Rehman Ramday, Faqir Muhammad Khokhar and Ch. Ijaz Ahmad, JJ |
| Parties | THE STATE — Petitioner Versus AMJAD ALI — Respondent |
| Primary Law | Control of Narcotic Substances Act (XXV of 1997) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in P L D 2007 Supreme Court 85 (PLP)?
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 P L D 2007 Supreme Court 85 (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the High Court bench comprising: Khalil-ur-Rehman Ramday, Faqir Muhammad Khokhar and Ch. Ijaz Ahmad, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: P L D 2007 Supreme Court 85 (PLP) (THE STATE — Petitioner Versus AMJAD ALI — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Ehtisham Qadir Shah, Advocate Supreme Court with Faiz-ur-Rehman, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioner.
- M.A. Qureshi, Advocate-on-Record for Respondent.
- 3. The State is before us questioning the said order. The learned Advocate Supreme Court for the State-petitioner has been heard. The learned Advocate-on-Record for the respondent has also been heard and we have also examined the record in the light of the submissions made before us.
Headnotes / Summary
Ss. 32, 33 & 36
Police Rules 1934, Vol. III, Chapter XXII, Rule 22.16
Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art.185(3)
Re-examination of confiscated goods
Scope
High Court, in the present case, had ordered for drawing fresh samples from parcels lying in Malkhana for their examination afresh without any reason being disclosed for such examination except that accused had submitted that if said narcotic substance was re-tested then it would be found that the same did not contain Charas
Unscrupulous litigants manoeuvr replacement of substances and articles deposited in Malkhana and then make prayer for re-examination of substance with result that narcotic substance which had already been examined/tested as narcotic substance was found to be something else
Such immoral practice was gaining momentum as a result whereof criminals were securing their acquittal through dishonest means
Courts were to curb such clandestine modus operandi adopted to screen offenders and make sure that once a substance had been tested then extraordinary reasons were to exist before directing fresh examination of such substance
No such reason having been disclosed by High Court in its order for re-examination of narcotic substance, such could not be sustained
Appeal was allowed.
Judgment & Decree
KHALIL-UR-REHMAN RAMDAY, J:
Seventeen kilograms of Charas had been allegedly recovered from the respondent. According to the impugned order of the learned High Court, samples were taken from the said narcotic substance which were then sent for examination and the result of the said examination had since been received.
2. Despite this, the learned High Court ordered drawing of fresh samples from the parcels lying in the Malkhana for their examination afresh without any reason being disclosed for the same and only because the learned counsel for the accused had submitted that if the said narcotic substance was re-tested then it would disclose that the same did not contain Charas.
3. The State is before us questioning the said order. The learned Advocate Supreme Court for the State-petitioner has been heard. The learned Advocate-on-Record for the respondent has also been heard and we have also examined the record in the light of the submissions made before us.
4. Instances are not unknown and are in fact increasing by the day, where unscrupulous litigants manoeuver replacement of the substances and articles deposited in the Malkhana; 'then make prayer for the re-examination of the substance and the result obviously is that the narcotic substance which had already been examined/tested as a narcotic substance was found to be something else. Such an immoral practice was gaining momentum as a result whereof the criminals were securing their acquittal through dishonest means. It was about time the learned Courts came alive to the said clandestine modus operandi adopted to screen offenders and made sure that once a substance had been tested then extraordinary reasons must exist and must be given before directing fresh examination of such a substance.
5. Since no such reasons had been disclosed by the learned High Court through the impugned order, therefore, the said order cannot be sustained. Consequently, this petition is converted into an appeal which is allowed as a result whereof the impugned order dated 24-1-2006 passed in Criminal Appeal No.396 of 2005 is set aside. No orders as to costs. S.M.B./S-73/S???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? Appeal allowed.