SIKANDAR HAYAT KHAN vs THE STATE and 2 others
This petition addresses whether an individual tried and acquitted or convicted by a Special Judge Customs for smuggling or possessing narcotics can face a second trial before a Special Judge under the Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997. The core legal question involves the protection against double jeopardy under constitutional and statutory provisions. Relying on the precedent established in Sabir Aziz v. Sessions Judge, Lahore, the court held that a second trial is barred as the offence of smuggling and carrying narcotics is one and the same, protected by Article 13 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973, section 26 of the General Clauses Act, and section 403 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Consequently, the court allowed the petition and quashed the pending case against the petitioner.
- Whether a person tried by a Special Judge Customs for smuggling or possession of narcotics can be tried for a second time under the Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997?
- Does Article 13 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973 bar a second trial for the same offence of smuggling and carrying narcotics?
- Article 13, Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973
- Section 26, General Clauses Act
- Section 403, Code of Criminal Procedure
' MALIK MUHAMMAD QAYYUM, J.--- The point in issue in this petition is as to whether a person who has been tried by the Special Judge Customs and either acquitted or convicted for smuggling or being in possession of narcotic can be tried for the second time by the Special Judge under the Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997.
2. This question came up for consideration before us in Sabir Aziz v. Sessions Judge, Lahore, 2000 PCr.LJ 204 wherein after exhaustive review of the case-law on the subject it was held that in view of Article 13 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973 as also section 26 of the General Clauses Act and section 403 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the second trial was barred. It was also observed that in such cases the offence is one and the same, which smuggling and carrying of narcotics. The facts of the aforesaid criminal miscellaneous petition are on all fours with the present case.
' In view of what has been said above, we allow this petition and quash the case pending against the petitioner in the Court of Special Judge, Narcotics/Special Judge, Lahore. There shall be no order as to costs.