MUHAMMAD SIDDIQ Versus STATE

The appellant has been convicted by judgment, dated 6‑5‑1979 of the learned Special Judge whereby the appellant has been convicted under clause (8) of section 156(1) of the Customs Act and sentenced to R.I. for 1‑1/2 years and fine of Rs.10,000 or in default to suffer further R.I. for 6 months. I have heard Mr. Muhammad Akmal Wasim, learned counsel for the appellant and Mr. A. Rashid Nizamani, learned counsel for the State.

2. It is an admitted position that notice under section 171 of the Customs Act, 1969, was not served upon the appellant. Then it is also an admitted position that the goods recovered from the taxi in which the appellant was sitting as a passenger were not sent to the chemical examiner for report as to whether the same were Charas or not. In any case, conviction of the appellant is liable to be set aside on the ground that notice under section 171 of the Customs Act, 1969 had not been served upon the appellant, which has been held to be mandatory in the following reported judgments:‑--

Abdur Rauf Khan v. Collector, Central Excise Land and Custom 1980 P Cr. L J 114, Azizullah v. State P L D 1981 Kar. 250, Abdur Rauf v. State 1983 P Cr. L J 19, Gufran Ahmed v. State 1983 P Cr. L J 620, Noor Dad v. State 1983 P Cr. L J 623 and Iqbal v. State 1983 P Cr. L J 598.

In the last 4 judgments referred to above, the convictions of the accused were set aside on the ground that notices under section 171 of the Customs Act had not been served upon the accused.

3. As a result, this appeal succeeds. The judgment, dated 6‑5‑1979 of the learned Special Judge in Case No. 120 of 1978 convicting and sentencing appellant Muhammad Sadiq son of Nannay Khan, is set aside.

M.Y.H./M‑28/K Appeal accepted.