The State vs Imran Nazir
This matter concerns criminal appeals filed by the State against the acquittal of respondents by the Peshawar High Court in a narcotics case. The respondents were originally convicted by a Special Court (CNS) for the possession of 2800 kilograms of charas recovered from a truck, resulting in life imprisonment and forfeiture of the vehicle. The core legal question before the Supreme Court was whether the High Court erred in acquitting the respondents based on the prosecution's failure to identify the specific driver of the vehicle, thereby failing to establish conscious possession. The Supreme Court upheld the acquittal, reasoning that when multiple individuals are present in a vehicle cabin, the prosecution must unambiguously identify the specific person in control to establish conscious possession. The Court affirmed that in the face of wavering prosecution evidence, the respondents were entitled to the benefit of the doubt, a fundamental principle of criminal jurisprudence. While the acquittal was maintained, the Court ordered that the forfeiture of the vehicle by the Anti-Narcotics Force remain intact.
- Is the prosecution required to identify the specific driver of a vehicle to establish conscious possession of contraband when multiple individuals are present?
- Does the failure of prosecution witnesses to clarify the role of occupants in a vehicle entitle the accused to the benefit of the doubt?
- Can the forfeiture of a vehicle remain intact even if the respondents are acquitted of the underlying narcotics charge?
- Section 9(c), Control of Narcotics Substances Act 1997
- Section 382-B, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
Qazi Muhammad Amin Ahmed, J.- Arisen out of the same backdrop with a common thread, the captioned appeals are being decided through this single judgment. Way back on 30.6.2004, Anti Narcotics Force, Peshawar on a tip off intercepted a Punjab bound truck bearing registration No.PRC-6168. Upon search, 2800 kilograms of charas was recovered from secret cavities of the vehicle; the respondents were apprehended and sent to face trial before the learned Judge, Special Court (CNS), Peshawar; they were returned a guilty verdict under Section 9 (c) of the Control of Narcotics Substances Act, 1997 and sentenced to imprisonment for life along side fine of Rs.500,000/- or to undergo five years S.I. in the event of default with benefit of Section 382-B of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The vehicle was forfeited in favour of the State. A learned division bench of the Peshawar High Court vide impugned judgment dated 24.7.2007 acquitted the respondents from the charge vires whereof are being challenged through leave of the Court on the ground that there was no occasion for the learned High Court to acquit the respondents merely on the ground that the prosecution witnesses failed to point out as to who was on the wheel when ANF contingent surprised them.
2. A huge quantity of contraband notwithstanding we have not been able to take exception to the view taken by the learned High Court inasmuch as in the presence of two individuals in the cabin it was incumbent upon the witnesses to unambiguously point out the person on the vehicle in order to establish conscious possession of the seized stuff and in the face of wavering positions taken by the prosecution itself, respondents cannot be denied the benefit of the doubt, a golden thread in our criminal jurisprudence. We do not feel inclined to interfere with the impugned judgment, however the forfeiture of vehicle impounded by the ANF is kept intact. Appeals are dismissed.
Cited by 1 case
- The STATE/ANTI NARCOTIC FORCE Versus IMRAN AHMED 2022 YLRN 164