Habib-ur-Rehman Versus State
This criminal appeal challenges the conviction and sentence of the appellant, Habib-ur-Rehman, who was found guilty by the trial court under Section 9(1)3c of the Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997, for the possession of 1100 grams of Charas. The core legal question was whether the prosecution successfully proved its case beyond a reasonable doubt, particularly in light of significant contradictions in the evidence presented. The Lahore High Court observed that the prosecution's narrative, which claimed the appellant was holding a shopping bag containing contraband in his right hand, was directly contradicted by the complainant's admission during cross-examination that the appellant was paralyzed and his right hand was non-functional. Furthermore, the court noted that the shopping bag itself was never taken into possession or exhibited during the trial. Consequently, the Court held that these anomalies created a reasonable doubt regarding the prosecution's story. The conviction was set aside, and the appellant was acquitted by extending the benefit of the doubt, establishing the principle that material contradictions in prosecution evidence necessitate acquittal.
- Does the failure to take into possession or exhibit the container of alleged contraband create a reasonable doubt in a narcotics case?
- Can a conviction under the Control of Narcotic Substances Act 1997 be sustained when the prosecution's physical description of the recovery is contradicted by medical evidence of the accused's physical disability?
- Does the benefit of doubt extend to an accused when material discrepancies exist in the prosecution's version of events?
- Section 9(1)3c, Control of Narcotic Substances Act 1997
- Section 382-B, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
- Section 25, Control of Narcotic Substances Act 1997
- Section 103, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
Ch. Abdul Aziz, J .--- Habib-ur-Rehman (appellant) involved in case FIR No.304/2023 dated 08.09.2023 registered under Section 9(1)3c of CNSA (Amended), 2022 at Police Station Kamar Mushani, was tried by learned Additional Sessions Judge/Judge Special Court (CNSA) Isa Khel. Trial court vide judgment dated 18.01.2024 proceeded to convict and sentence the appellant in the following terms:-
Under Section 9(1)3c of CNSA, 1997 to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 09-years with the direction to pay Rs.80,000/- as fine and in default whereof to further undergo simple imprisonment for 06-months.
The benefit of Section 382-B of Cr.P.C., however, was extended in favour of the appellant.
2. Arguments heard. Record perused.
3. It is discernible from the record that Jahan Khan ASI (PW.1) along with three other police officials was present at Graveyard Morr Naisry Wala in an official vehicle for the purpose of patrolling duty. Meanwhile a pedestrian emerged there and upon noticing the police tried to flee away but was apprehended on suspicion. The person so nabbed later disclosed his name as Habib ur Rehman (appellant) and from the blue coloured shopping bag which he was holding in his right hand Charas Paira Numa weighing 1100 grams was recovered, out of which 55 grams were separated for chemical analysis.
4. Before proceeding any further, it is considered appropriate to mention here that the cases arising out of CNSA, 1997 have limited scope for defence keeping in view the stringent provisions. Through necessary implication of Section 25 of CNSA, 1997 the recovery proceedings attain acceptance even if not conducted in adherence to Section 103, Cr.P.C. Likewise, the false implication of an accused due to some personal grudge is difficult to prove and inexorably is hard nut to crack for the prosecution. In the given circumstances, the discrepancies which give a reasonable doubt about the truth of prosecution case then benefit arising out of them ought to be extended to accused facing trial. In the case in hand, it is noticed that according to the claim of the prosecution the shopping bag, from which the contraband substance was recovered, was held by the appellant in this right hand. However, during cross-examination, Jahan Khan Niazi SI (PW.1) admitted in unequivocal terms that the appellant was paralyzed and his right hand was not working. This aspect creates a serious doubt in the prosecution story. It is also observed that according to the prosecution case the Charas was recovered from the blue coloured shopping bag but perusal of recovery memo. (Exh.PA) reveals that the said shopping bag was not taken into possession by the complainant-police officer nor was exhibited during trial.
5. From the anomalies mentioned hereinabove, we are persuaded to hold that a reasonable doubt emerges about the guilt of appellant Resultantly the instant criminal appeal filed by Habib Ur Rehman (appellant) is accepted;, his conviction and sentence are set-aside and he stands acquitted of the charge by extending benefit of doubt in his favour. He is under custody. He shall be released forthwith if not required to be detained in any other criminal case.
JK/H-13/L Appeal allowed.