KHAIR MUHAMMAD vs STATE
The petitioner, Khair Muhammad, sought leave to appeal against the judgment of the High Court of Balochistan, which dismissed his criminal appeal and maintained his conviction and sentence for narcotics possession. The core legal question was whether the lower courts erred in convicting the petitioner based on the recovery of a large quantity of charas from a vehicle under his control, despite his defense of false implication and alibi. The Supreme Court of Pakistan held that the prosecution successfully established its case through convincing evidence of the recovery of 61 kilograms of charas from secret compartments of the vehicle at the petitioner's pointation, and the petitioner failed to prove any police animosity or reason for false substitution. Consequently, the petition was dismissed and leave to appeal was refused, affirming the concurrent findings of the lower courts.
- Whether concurrent findings of lower courts regarding the conviction for narcotics possession warrant interference by the Supreme Court when supported by convincing evidence?
- Does the recovery of a large quantity of contraband from secret parts of a vehicle exclusively known to the accused suffice to sustain a conviction under the Control of Narcotic Substances Act 1997?
- Can a plea of false implication by the police succeed without establishing concrete animosity or a motive for substitution?
- Section 342, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
- Section 340(2), Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
- Section 9(c), Control of Narcotic Substances Act 1997
- Section 382(B), Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
Abdul Hameed Dogar, J.--Petitioner, Khair Muhammad, seeks leave to appeal against the judgment dated 19.5.2004 passed by a learned Division Bench of High Court of Balochistan, Quetta, whereby Criminal Appeal No, 298/2002 filed by him was dismissed and his conviction and sentence awarded by the trial Court were maintained.
2. Briefly, stated the facts of the case are that on 10.3.2001, CIA staff viz. complainant party received an information that a Pajero Jeep bearing No, GTB-505 blue in colour will be crossing at 6.45 p.m. with contraband inside. On such information they stopped the said vehicle and apprehended the petitioner. During the search of above said vehicle 50 packets of backed charas containing 1 KG. each were found concealed in the doors of the vehicle 4 grams from each packet were recovered for chemical examination, which in all become 200 grams. During investigation, the petitioner disclosed that about 11 K.Gs charas have also been concealed under the driver seat of the said vehicle, which too, was recovered. On competition of investigation he was sent to face the trial before the Court learned Special Judge CNSAIII, Quetta.
3. The prosecution in order to establish its case examined 6 witnesses, namely, Jan Muhammad PW-1, Shahid Haneef PW-2, Nazeer Ahmed PW-3, Ahmedul Karim PW-4, Amanullah SI PW-5 and Azhar Hussain PW.
4. The petitioner in his statement recorded under Section 342 Cr.P.C. claimed innocence. He, however, examined himself on Oath under Section 340(2) Cr.P.C. and examined Ali Ahmed DW-1 and Ellahi Bakhsh DW-2 in his defence.
5. On completion of trial, the petitioner was convicted under Section 9(c) of Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997 and sentenced to imprisonment for life with a fine of Rs, 50,000/- or in case of non-payment of fine to undergo further S.I. for two years with benefit of Section 382 (B) Cr.P.C.
6. We have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and have gone through the record and the proceedings of the case in minute particulars.
7. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner mainly contended that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the case at the place of main culprit namely Sakhi Mir Ahmed. According to the petitioner, he does not know the driving and was not put to driving test by the police though claimed by him. He further stated that the petitioner at the time of incident had gone to a doctor for medical treatment and at the moment he came out the clinic he was apprehended by the police and was falsely involved in this case. He reiterated the same stance as taken by him in his statement recorded on Oath as well as by the defence witnesses.
8. The learned counsel for the State supported the impugned judgment and contended that the conviction and sentence were rightly awarded to him by the trial Court and affirmed by the High Court and the petitioner has not been able to show any reason for his false implication in the case.
9. We have gone through the evidence and the judgments of both the Courts below and do not find any illegality, misreading or non-appreciation of which otherwise is convincing and truthful. In this case, 61 K.Gs charas have been recovered at the pointation of the petitioner from the secret parts of the pajero jeep about which only the petitioner had its exclusive knowledge. He has admittedly failed to show any sort of animosity with the police for his false implication or substitution in the case. Irrespective of the above, samples sent to the Chemical Examiner were opined to contain charas. It is unbelievable that such huge quantity of contraband can be foisted without any valid reason which in the instant case is missing.
10. Accordingly, we do not find any reason to interfere with the impugned judgment, thus the petition being devoid of force is dismissed and leave to appeal refused.