1992 PLP 1520 (MLD)

Respondent in person. Date of hearing: 15th May, 1991 . Respondent Muhammad Younus alias Tarzan was tried by learned Special Judge (Customs & Taxation), Karachi, for the offence under section 156(1) (8) of the Customs Act, 1969, who found him not guilty and vide judgment dated 4‑2‑1991, acquitted him. This judgment is the subject‑matter of the present appeal filed under section 185‑F of the Customs Act, 1969.

2. An information was received by the Pakistan Customs from Interpol Rome, Italy that contraband Charas (HASHISH) weighing 5,000 kgs. was seized by the Italian Customs in the harbour of La‑Spezia, Italy. This Charas was found concealed in a container No.1TIU‑421611/0, which according to shipping documents was to contain bed‑sheets. On receipt of this information a comprehensive investigation was initiated which revealed that the consignment of bed‑sheets was taken on board the vessel s.s. "Leerot" and was exported by M/s. M.Y. Traders, S.No.1l, Plot No.F‑140, S.I.T.E. Karachi to M/s. Intercontrade SA. Geneva, Switzerland, through clearing agent M/s. Khan Enterprises CHAL No.765. The investigation further revealed that respondent Muhammad Younus alias Tarzan hatched a conspiracy to smuggle 5,000 kgs. of Charas under the guise of bed‑sheets and he got opened account of M/s. M.Y. Traders under the fake name of Muhammad Yaseen son of Abdul Ghaffar in the United Bank Limited, Nazimabad, Karachi, against account No.21715 and in doing so he used his ex‑employee Altaf Balwani, who acted as exporter i.e. M/s. M.Y. Traders. On the basis of this evidence the respondent alongwith Altaf Balwani, Abdul Jabbar and Haji Younus were sent up to stand trial. The remaining three accused were however, prosecuted in their absence under section 512, Cr.P.C.

3. The case proceeded before the learned Special Judge (Customs and Taxation), Karachi, who examined Khawaja Zeeshan Hussain, SPO (P.W.1), ,Abdul Maroof (P.W.2), Shamsuddin Qadri (P.W.3), Abdul Majeed Khan (P.W.4), Jan Muhammad (P.W.5), Saleem Ahmad Zia (P.W.6), Muhammad Amin (P.W.7) and Sabah Yousuf, I.O.(P.W.8).

4. The respondent met the charge with a bare denial. He did not examine himself on oath and also led no other evidence.

5. On the assessment of evidence, both oral as well as documentary, the learned Special Judge found the appellant not guilty and acquitted him accordingly.

6. I have heard Mr. M. Ilyas Khan; learned counsel for the appellant and perused the record of the trial Court carefully.

7. The evidence which has come on record does not connect the respondent with the alleged offence in any manner. Complainant Khawaja Zeeshan Hussain, SPO (P.W.1), who is one of the most important witnesses of the prosecution has conceded in clear terms that none of the documents produced in Court implicates the respondent. 1n fact there is no iota of evidence on record making out a case of abetment or connivance of the respondent in taking out the contraband Charas out of Pakistan and I fully share the view taken by the learned Special Judge that it was a case of no evidence against the respondent.

8. According to large volume of the case‑law an appeal against acquittal is to be judged by a standard different from that applicable to that against conviction and the appellate Court has to be satisfied that the judgment o acquittal is patently illegal and perverse.. No such situation .exists in this case and the judgment recorded by Special Judge is proper and based on sound reasoning.

9. In the result I find no merits in this appeal, which is dismissed in limine. N.H.Q/S‑871/K Appeal dismissed.