2007 PLP 1378 (SCMR)
MUHAMMAD IRSHAD — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent
| Citation | 2007 PLP 1378 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | Supreme Court of Pakistan |
| Bench Members | Javed Iqbal and Muhammad Nawaz Abbasi, JJ |
| Parties | MUHAMMAD IRSHAD — 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 2007 PLP 1378 (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 1378 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Supreme Court of Pakistan bench comprising: Javed Iqbal and Muhammad Nawaz Abbasi, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2007 PLP 1378 (SCMR) (MUHAMMAD IRSHAD — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Sardar Abdul Majeed, Advocate Supreme Court for Petitioner.
- Date of hearing: 8th May, 2006.
- Muhammad Zaman Bhatti, Advocate Supreme Court for the State.
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from the judgment, dated 11-10-2005 passed by Lahore High Court, Rawalpindi Bench, in Criminal Appeal No.627 of 2002).
S. 9(c)
Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art.185(3)
Huge quantity of opium contained in bags was recovered from the possession of accused in presence of witnesses and he was arrested at the spot
Recovery was proved by the member of raiding party who had no personal reason to involve the 'accused in a false case
No material discrepancy or contradiction could be pointed out in the evidence suggesting a slight doubt in the prosecution case arising in favour of accused-Concurrent findings of the two Courts regarding the guilt of accused did not suffer from any legal or factual defect calling for interference of Supreme Court
Leave to appeal was declined to accused in circumstances. Muhammad Zaman Bhatti, Advocate Supreme Court for the State.
Judgment & Decree
MUHAMMAD NAWAZ ABBASI, J.
This jail petition has been directed against the judgment dated 11-10-2005 passed by, a Division Bench of the Lahore High Court, Rawalpindi Bench whereby appeal filed by the petitioner against the conviction under section 9(c) of the Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997 and sentence of life imprisonment with a fine of Rs.1,00,000 awarded to him by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Rawalpindi vide judgment dated 26-9-2001, was dismissed.
2. The petitioner was apprehended by a police party headed by Muhammad Taj, A.S.-I. at 1-00 a.m. on 15-9-1997 in the area of Police Station Pir Wadhai, Rawalpindi and having been found in possession of two bags contained 40 Kgs. of opium, out of which 2-1/2 kilogram opium was separated in the sealed parcel for chemical analysis and as per report sent by the Chemical Examiner the parcel contained opium. The petitioner pleaded not guilty to the charge and having denied the recovery of narcotics from his possession in his statement under section 342, Cr.P.C. stated that he was falsely involved in the case by the police party on account of his raising objection to the conduct of police officials of taking bribe from a person. The petitioner however, has not been able to bring on record anything in disproof of the charge to set up a plausible defence to discredit the prosecution evidence.
3. The perusal of record with the assistance of learned counsel for the petitioner and State would not show any legal or factual defect in the concurrent findings of the two Courts regarding the guilt of the petitioner calling for interference of this Court. The opium in huge quantity contained in bags was recovered from the possession of the petitioner in presence of the witnesses and he was arrested at the spot. The recovery was proved by the member of raiding party who had no personal reason to involve the petitioner in a false case. The learned counsel for the petitioner has not been able to point out any material discrepancy and contradiction in the evidence suggesting a slight doubt in the prosecution case arising in favour of petitioner and consequently, we would not take any exception to the judgment of the High Court.
4. In the light of foregoing reasons, we do not find any substance in this petition and the same is accordingly dismissed. Leave is refused. N. H. Q./M-202/SC Leave refused.