CNSA | The Peshawar High Court upheld the conviction for possession of 2,400 grams of hashish, holding that the testimony of police officers would be considered credible unless there was solid evidence of malice or enmity against them. 2024 Y L R 1000

The Peshawar High Court upheld the conviction for possession of 2,400 grams of hashish, holding that the testimony of police officers would be considered credible unless there was solid evidence of malice or enmity against them.
2024 Y L R 1000



پشاور ہائی کورٹ کے اس فیصلے کے اہم نکات درج ذیل ہیں:

1. پولیس گواہی کی اہمیت:
عدالت نے کہا کہ پولیس اہلکاروں کی گواہی معتبر سمجھی جائے گی جب تک ان کے خلاف بدنیتی یا دشمنی کا کوئی ثبوت نہ ہو۔ اس طرح کے شواہد قابلِ اعتماد ہوتے ہیں۔


2. شواہد میں معمولی تضادات:
عدالت نے فیصلہ کیا کہ اگرچہ شواہد میں معمولی تضادات موجود ہیں، جیسے کہ چرس کے رنگ کے بارے میں اختلاف، یہ تضادات مقدمے کے فیصلے پر اثرانداز نہیں ہوتے اور ان کو غیر اہم قرار دیا۔


3. محفوظ تحویل اور منتقلی:
برآمد شدہ چرس کی محفوظ تحویل اور فورنزک لیب تک وقت پر منتقلی کو ثابت کیا گیا، جس سے مقدمے کی حقیقت کو مزید تقویت ملی۔


4. مقدمے کا ثابت ہونا:
عدالت نے اس بات کو واضح کیا کہ جب شواہد مضبوط ہوں اور کوئی معقول شک نہ ہو، تو ملزم پر عائد الزامات کو ثابت سمجھا جائے گا۔



یہ نکات اس کیس کے اہم ترین پہلو ہیں جن پر فیصلہ مبنی تھا۔

2024 Y L R 1000

[Peshawar]

Before Dr. Khurshid Iqbal, J

MUSA RAZA---Appellant

Versus

The STATE---Respondent

Criminal Appeal No. 633-P of 2022, decided on 19th August, 2022.

(a) Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Control of Narcotic Substances Act (XXXI of 2019)---

----S. 9(d)---Possession of narcotics---Appreciation of evidence---Prosecution case was that 2400 grams charas in a sack was recovered from the possession of accused---Presence of the accused on the spot while being apprehended was not doubted in any manner whatsoever---Prosecution's contention that the flour sack in possession of the accused contained the contraband charas along with the bread crumbs was not shattered visibly and materially---Not even a suggestion was put to the complainant/ Seizing Officer that the flour sack containing the contraband charas, was not in possession of the accused, or belonged to the acquitted co-accused, or that the accused had no knowledge of it---Moreover, it was fully established that the accused was caught red handed, having the contraband charas in the flour sack that contained bread crumbs---Place of the occurrence, too, was not doubted---Place of the occurrence was a thickly populated area, but no private person was associated and only the Police Officials present there were made witnesses of the recovery---However, evidence of the Police Officials who deposed against the accused was not shattered---Evidence of the Police Officials should be scrutinized with care and caution---Thus, where in the circumstances of a case, like the one in hand, the evidence of the Police Officials was natural, consistent, and confidence inspiring, coupled with the fact that neither ill will nor enmity, was, alleged against Police officials or it was alleged but not proved, it would weigh heavily in the scale of justice---Circumstances established that the prosecution had proved the charge beyond any reasonable shadow of doubt---Appeal in hand was accordingly dismissed.

       Haftay Khan v. The State 2013 PCr.LJ 1374; Sayyar v. The State PLD 2015 Pesh. 157 and Akhtar Zarin v. The State 2022 MLD 796 ref.

       Faisal Shahzad v. The State 2022 SCMR 905; Liaquat Ali and another v. The State 2022 SCMR 1097; Rehmat Gul v. The State 2022 PCr.LJ 10 and Muhammad Faisal v. The State 2022 YLR 1163 rel.

(b) Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Control of Narcotic Substances Act (XXXI of 2019)---

----S. 9(d)---Possession of narcotics---Appreciation of evidence---Contradictions in evidence--- Not consequential---Prosecution case was that 2400 grams charas in sack was recovered from the possession of accused---Allegedly, there were certain anomalies in the site plan vis-à-vis the DD placed on the record---These were not material contradictions as the star witnesses of the prosecution, the complainant/Seizing Officer, the marginal witness of the recovery memo and the Investigating Officer were not successfully challenged in cross-examination---No cross-examination was made to the effect that the occurrence didn't take place on the site mentioned in the murasila, rather, the site plan was confirmed from them---Allegedly, witnesses differed over the colour of the contraband charas---One witness said it was pink; the latter said it was brown---However, this, could not be termed so substantial as to be seen nugatory of the very recovery from the accused---Circumstances established that the prosecution had proved the charge beyond any reasonable shadow of doubt---Appeal was accordingly dismissed.

(c) Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Control of Narcotic Substances Act (XXXI of 2019)---

----S. 9(d)---Possession of narcotics---Appreciation of evidence---Safe custody and safe transmission of the contraband charas established---Prosecution case was that 2400 grams charas in sack was recovered from the possession of accused---Prosecution also proved the safe custody and safe transmission of the contraband charas as it produced both the Police Officials who received it for safe custody and entered it in the relevant Register in the police station and the one who took it to the Forensic Science Laboratory---No delay occurred in sending the contraband charas for chemical examination---Chemical report was positive which noted that necessary protocols were followed in the process---Recovery having been proved, so the burden shifted to the accused that he was innocent---Although, the accused strived to toss the plea of altercation with the Police Officials, he badly failed to substantiate it either by his evidence or even by avowing in his statement recorded under S. 342, Cr.P.C---Circumstances established that the prosecution had proved the charge beyond any reasonable shadow of doubt---Appeal was accordingly dismissed.

       Muhammad Jehangir Khan for Appellant.

       Ma. Shakila Begum, A.A.G. for the State.

       Date of hearing: 19th August, 2022.

 

For more information call us 0092-324-4010279 Whatsapp Dear readers if u like this post plz comments and follow us. Thanks for reading .as you know our goal is to aware people of their rights and how can get their rights. we will answer every question, so we need your help to achieve our goal. plz tell people about this blog and subscribe to our youtube channel and follow us at the end of this post.



  













 



 







































 


































Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Property ki taqseem ,Warasat main warson ka hisa

Punishment for violation of section 144 crpc | dafa 144 in Pakistan means,kia hai , khalaf warzi per kitni punishment hu gi،kab or kese lagai ja ja sakti hai.

Bachon ki custody of minors after divorce or separation