THE STATE through Advocate-General vs Mian MUHAMMAD ARSHAD
This petition for leave to appeal was filed by the State against a judgment of the High Court of Sindh, which acquitted the respondent of charges under the Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997. The respondent had been convicted by the trial court for the possession of 300 kilograms of Charas recovered from a vehicle in which he was traveling. The High Court subsequently overturned this conviction. The State contended that the High Court erred by discarding prosecution evidence, specifically challenging the rejection of a recovery witness's testimony solely on the grounds that the witness had appeared in other cases. The State argued that this reasoning was legally flawed and that the High Court failed to properly review the total evidence to determine the respondent's guilt. Upon review, the Supreme Court granted leave to appeal to reappraise the evidence. The core legal question is whether the High Court's acquittal was based on a misapplication of legal principles regarding the evaluation of witness testimony and the overall assessment of prosecution evidence in narcotics cases.
- Can the testimony of a prosecution witness be discarded solely on the ground that the witness has appeared in other cases?
- What is the legal obligation of the High Court when reviewing evidence in an appeal against a conviction in a narcotics case?
- Under what circumstances will the Supreme Court grant leave to appeal to reappraise evidence following an acquittal by the High Court?
- Section 9(c), Control of Narcotic Substances Act 1997
ORDER
' IFTIKHAR MUHAMMAD CHAUDHRY, J.--- This petition for leave to appeal has been filed against the judgment dated 20th November, 2002 passed by the High Court of Sindh, Karachi, whereby Criminal Appeal No,111 of 2001 filed by respondent has been accepted and he was acquitted of the charge under section 9(c) of the Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997.
2. Precisely stating the facts of the case are that respondent was apprehended on 4th May, 1999 by the Excise Police when he was boarding on a Vehicle bearing No,IG-6077, Honda Civic, black colour, along with the driver namely Tony. No sooner the vehicle was stopped, the driver made his escape good. As far as the respondent is concerned, he was, however, and from the search of vehicle, 300 Kgs. Of Charas, packed in 20 cartons was recovered from rear seat and the dickey of the car.
Accordingly, case was registered vide F.I.R. No,7 of 1999 at Police Station Karachi South.
Investigations were carried out and he was sent up to face trial before the Court of competent jurisdiction. As the respondent did not plead guilty to the charge read over to him and claimed trial, therefore, prosecution led evidence to substantiate accusation against him. Learned trial Court, on conclusion of the trial, vide judgment dated 15th July, 2000, opined that he is guilty for the commission of the offence and sentenced him to imprisonment for life with fine of Rs,10 lacs, in default whereof to undergo 5 years' R.I. Appeal filed by the respondent before the High Court of Sindh, Karachi was accepted by means of impugned judgment and he was acquitted of the charge. As such instant petition for leave to appeal has been filed by the State.
3. Learned Additional Advocate-General (Sindh) contended that respondent was apprehended at the spot and huge quantity of Charas was recovered from the vehicle in which he was travelling along with absconding accused, therefore, prosecution produced trustworthy evidence to substantiate charge against him but the learned High Court disbelieved the prosecution evidence for the reasons which are not available under the law. He further contended that material pieces of evidence available on record has been discarded by the learned High Court for the reason that one of the recovery witnesses P.W. Zulfiqar Ali, has appeared in number of cases as eye-witness, whereas it is settled principle of law that testimony of a witness cannot be disbelieved for such reason and in such state of affairs, learned High Court had a legal obligation to review the total evidence available on record in order to ascertain whether the prosecution has fully established guilt against the accused by producing confidence inspiring evidence.
4. After hearing learned Additional Advocate-General and having gone through the material available on record, leave to appeal is granted to reappraise the evidence in order to ascertain as to whether acquittal has been recorded by the High Court in violation of the judgment reported as Ghulam Sikandar and others v. Mamraz Khan and others PLD 1985 SC 11.
' To prove the attendance of the respondent his bailable warrants of arrest in the sum of Rs,1,00,000 (Rupees one lac) returnable to the Registrar of this Court be issued.