DAUL A T KHAN vs THE STATE
This petition for leave to appeal arises from a judgment of the Sindh High Court, which upheld the petitioner's conviction and sentence under the Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997. The petitioner was convicted for the possession of 30 kilograms of contraband Charas. The core legal question presented for examination is whether a conviction for possession of a large quantity of narcotics can be sustained when the prosecution drew a sample for chemical analysis from only one of the thirty recovered packets. The Supreme Court granted leave to appeal to determine if the conviction is legally sound given this method of sampling and to further assess whether the sentence imposed was harsh and excessive under these specific circumstances. The Court's decision to grant leave indicates that the sufficiency of evidence based on limited sampling remains a critical issue for final adjudication, requiring a review of whether the entire bulk can be deemed narcotic based on a single sample.
- Can a conviction for possession of a large quantity of narcotics be sustained when a chemical sample is drawn from only one of multiple packets?
- Is a sentence excessive when based on the possession of multiple packets of contraband where only one packet was verified as narcotic?
- Section 9(c), Control of Narcotic Substances Act 1997
ORDER
' In this petition arising out of Sindh High Court judgment dated 5-12-2006 upholding the conviction and sentence of the petitioner under section 9(c) of the Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997 by Special Court-1, C.N.S. Karachi, sole question for examination appears to be whether the petitioner can be held guilty for possessing 30 kilograms of contraband Charas when out of 30 packets possessed by petitioner, sample was drawn only from one packet which on examination was found to be narcotic substance by the Chemical Examiner. A reference has been made to the judgment reported as Waris Khan v. State 2006 SCM R 1051 and Muhammad Hashim v. State PLD 2004 SC 856.
2. Leave to appeal is accordingly granted to consider the aforesaid question and to examine whether the sentence awarded to the petitioner was harsh and excessive in view of drawal of a sample only from one packet.
Cited by 2 cases
- AMEER ZEB Versus State 2012 PLD 380
- Ameer Zeb vs The State 2012 PSC (Crl.) 130