MUHAMMAD LATIF Versus THE STATE
This is an appeal by Muhammad Latif, appellant, against his conviction and sentence under section 156(1)(89) of the Customs Act.
2. The prosecution case in brief is that Muhammad Yaqoob Inspector Police P.W.1, who was attached with the Crime Branch Railway 'Police, Lahore, on 15‑6‑1979 had gone to Sahiwal to check Quetta Express. On his return to Lahore at 3‑20 p.m. Muhammad Latif, accused, alighted from that train from the 1st Class Compartment and engaged a cooli namely, Qayyum P.W.4, who brought down four attache cases, one hand bag and a carton on the platform. The accused was arrested and twenty‑seven thans of foreign cloth and foreign crockery were recovered from the luggage of the accused, for the possession of which he could not properly explain. Muhammad Yaqoob Inspector P.W.1 recorded the complaint and sent it to the police station for the registration of a case.
3. I have heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the appellant and the State and have also perused the record. The case of the appellant is that when he was travelling towards Lahore in Quetta Express, four‑five persons, who were the owners of the crockery and cloth, alighted at the Okara Railway Station with the said goods. He also alighted from the train to have some water, when three‑four constables came there, who apprehended him, whilst the real owners ran away. He told the constables that he had nothing to do with the goods and that they should chase and apprehend the real culprits, but nobody listened to him. The goods belonging to the persons who had run away were seized and taken into possession and he was falsely involved in this case. Muhammad Yaqoob Inspector P.W.1, Muhammad Shafi, the public witness, P.W.2, Farman Ali S.I. P.W.3 and Abdul Qayyum the porter, P.W.4 supported the prosecution case regarding the arrest of the appellant at Lahore Railway Station. Muhammad Yaqoob Inspector P.W.1 and Farman Ali P.W.3 in cross‑examination denied the fact that the appellant was detained at Okara by Head Constables and Foot Constable and brought to Lahore, after arrest the seizure there, and then ultimately produced before the former. However, Abdul Qayyum Porter P.W.4 in his cross -examination stated that the police who had apprehended the accused had also come out of the First Class Compartment from which the accused alighted, that the police had overpowered the accused, who was in handcuffs, and that from the talk of the police‑people it appeared that they had arrested the accused at Okara or some other station. The appellant's story appears to have a ring of truth. It appears that the appellant was arrested at Okara by some Head Constable or Foot Constables, but since his arrest and seizure would have been illegal, as they had no power to effect the same under the Customs Act, they brought the appellant to Lahore, where his arrest and seizure could be shown to be effected by the Police officers who had such authority. Since the story of the prosecution witnesses does not have any ring of truth, t, have no hesitation in rejecting the same.
4. Apart from the above, neither Muhammad Yaqoob Inspector P.W.1 nor Farman Ali S.I. P.W.3 at any stage stated that any notice under section 171 of the Customs Act, giving grounds of seizure or arrest, was served on the appellant at the time of his arrest at the Lahore Railway Station. In the absence of service of such notice, the whole proceedings stand vitiated. If any authority is required for this view, Aziz Ullah v. The State P L D 1981 Kar. 250 may be referred.
5. For the foregoing reasons, the conviction and sentence of Muhammad Latif, appellant, appear to be illegal.
6. This appeal is accepted and the conviction and sentence of Muhammad Latif, appellant, are set aside. He is on bail. His bail bond shall stand discharged.
S.A./M‑808/L Appeal accepted.