' TANVIR AHMED KHAN, J.---Leave to appeal is sought against the judgment, dated 14-7-2003 whereby a learned Division Bench of the Lahore High Court, Bahawalpur Bench, Bahawalpur dismissed the Criminal Appeal No,40 of 2003 filed by the petitioner.
2. Facts briefly are that F.I.R. No,108 of 2002 was got registered at the instance of P.W.3, Maqbool Hussain on 28-3-2002 at Police Station, Saddar Chishtian under section 9-C of Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997 as the petitioner was apprehended in a raid which was conducted upon an information and 5 K.G. Of Charas was recovered from his possession. Out of the same 10 grams Charas was sent to the Chemical Examiner for test. After usual investigation, challan was submitted. The prosecution examined four witnesses to substantiate its case. The petitioner in his statement under section 342, Cr.P.C. Denied his implication and sated that he had been involved due to enmity. He also made a statement under section 340(2), Cr.P.C. And got examined Hafiz Abdul Rehman as D.W.1. The learned Additional Sessions Judge, Chishtian, after thrashing the entire evidence, convicted the petitioner under section 9-C of the Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997 and sentenced him to 4 years R.I. With a fine of Rs,20,000 in default whereof to suffer imprisonment for 6 months, through his judgment dated 29-1-2003. Benefit of section 382-B, Cr.P.C.
Was also accorded to him. The petitioner filed an appeal before the Lahore High Court, Bahawalpur Bench, Bahawalpur, which has been dismissed through the impugned judgment. Hence, this petition for leave to appeal.
3. We have considered the contentions raised the learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the documents appended with this petition. The prosecution has proved its case by producing 4 witnesses. P.W.2 Muhammad Abbasi and P.W.3 Maqbool Hussain have substantiated the apprehension and recovery of the incriminating material from him. They do not have any malice or enmity against him. Their testimony cannot be discarded simply for the reason of being police officials if it otherwise confidence inspiring. As has already stated they did not have any malice or reasons to implicate him with the possession of such a huge amount of Charas. The Chemical Examiner report was also positive in nature.
4. The argument of the learned counsel that the incriminating material was taken by Khadim Hussain, P.W. While the same was given to Abdul Ghafar, according to P.W.1 would not advance his case any further. The learned Division Bench while dismissing the appeal has attended to all these aspects and dismissed the same by advancing cogent reasons. Learned counsel for the petitioner has failed to point out any illegality in the impugned judgment warranting interference.
5. Resultantly, for what has been stated above, the instant petition, has no merits, which is accordingly dismissed and leave to appeal is refused.