SHAHZAD AMJAD vs STATE
This petition for leave to appeal arises from a criminal conviction for narcotics smuggling. The petitioner was apprehended at Islamabad Airport while in possession of a bag containing 1780 grams of heroin, which was discovered by Customs officials. The core legal question was whether the petitioner, who admitted to possessing the bag but claimed ignorance of its contents, could be held liable for narcotics trafficking under the Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997. The Supreme Court upheld the conviction and sentence, dismissing the petition. The Court held that the petitioner's admission of guilt in his statements under Section 342 and Section 340(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898, combined with the recovery of narcotics from a bag in his possession, established his culpability beyond doubt. The Court rejected the defense of lack of knowledge, noting that the petitioner voluntarily accepted the bag for international transport. The key principle laid down is that possession of narcotics, coupled with an admission of guilt during trial proceedings, is sufficient to sustain a conviction for smuggling, regardless of claims of ignorance regarding the specific contents of the container.
- Does an admission of guilt in a statement under Section 342 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898 constitute sufficient evidence to uphold a narcotics conviction?
- Can a person be held liable for narcotics smuggling if they claim ignorance of the contents of a bag they were transporting?
- Is the recovery of narcotics from a bag in the possession of an accused sufficient to establish guilt under the Control of Narcotic Substances Act 1997?
- Section 9(C), Control of Narcotic Substances Act 1997
- Section 342, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
- Section 340(2), Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
Abdul Hameed Dogar, J.--Petitioner seeks leave to appeal against the judgment dated 12.5.2003 passed by a learned Division Bench of the Lahore High Court, Rawalpindi Bench, Rawalpindi, whereby Criminal Appeal No, 488 of 2002 filed by him was dismissed.
2. Briefly, stated, the facts leading to the filing of the instant petition are that on 29.10.2001 at about 8.30 a.m. petitioner Shahazad Amjad possessing German Passport No, 2031653927 and Ticket No, 176-3539497811 with a black colour hand bag was apprehended by complainant Aftab Ahmed Butt, Inspector Customs, at Islamabad Airport. On the search of said bag, 1780 grams of heroin was found concealed in the inner layer of the bag which was taken into possession. Two samples of five grams each were separated and sealed for chemical analysis whereas rest quantity was sealed in separate parcel. Petitioner and his co-convict Muhammad Anwas were taken into custody and were sent alongwith the written complaint to Police Station Airport, Rawalpindi, for registration of case, where FIR No, 508 was lodged under Section 9(C) of the Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997 (hereinafter referred to as "The Act"). On completion of investigation, both of them were sent up to face trial.
3. At trial, prosecution examined five witnesses in all and produced the report of Chemical Examiner in evidence as Ex. PE. Petitioner in his statement recorded under Section 342 Cr.P.C, admittedly the guilt while claiming that in fact the bag was handed over to him by co-convict Muhammad Anwas at the Airport for onward transmission to Nadeem Ashraf Butt alias Pasha living in Frankfurt, Germany. He examined himself on oath under Section 340(2) Cr.P.C. wherein also he raised the same plea. However, he did not examine anyone in defence.
4. On conclusion of trial, petitioner and co-convict Muhammad Anwas were found guilty of the offence and were convicted under Section 9(c) of the Act and was sentenced to suffer R.I. for ten years with fine of Rs, 1,00,000/- or in default to suffer S.I. for two years.
5. Feeling aggrieved, petitioner preferred above mentioned appeal before High Court which was dismissed and conviction and sentence was maintained vide impugned judgment.
6. We have heard Ch. Arshad Ali, learned ASC for petitioner and have gone through the record and the proceedings of the case in minute particulars.
7. Learned counsel for petitioner mainly contended that petitioner had no knowledge that the bag in question, which was handed over to him by his co-convict Muhammad Anwas, in fact contained any narcotics substance. It was locked and its lock was broken by Customs Authorities at the Airport which prima faice shows the ignorance of petitioner.
8. Admittedly, petitioner was found in possession of bag containing narcotics which was opened in his presence and 1780 grams of heroin w p, recovered from its inner layer. Since petitioner has admitted the guilt in his statements recorded under Sections 342 and 340(2) Cr.P.C., as such it would of be necessary to discuss the prosecution evidence which even otherwise Ily establishes the case against him. The plea that petitioner had no knowledge about the narcotics concealed inside the layer of the bag is devoid of force, mainly for the reason that petitioner voluntarily took the bag from o-convict Muhammad Anwas at Airport for onward transmission to adeem Ashraf Butt alias Pasha to Frankfurt. The said bag was opened in his presence and 1780 grams of heroin was recovered from inside the same rom which two samples were taken which were opined to be heroin as per report of Chemical Examiner. Irrespective of the above, the fact that petitioner was having German Passport and Ticket for Frankfurt at the relevant time further corroborates the case of prosecution.
9. From the above resume, it is proved beyond any shadow of doubt that petitioner while attempting to smuggle narcotics out of Pakistan was intercepted at Islamabad Airport.
10. For what has been discussed above, we do not find any justification to interfere with the impugned judgment which is accordingly maintained.
11.Resultantly, petition being devoid of force is dismissed and leave to appeal refused.