' ABDUL HAMEED DOGAR, J.--- Petitioner, Taj Wali, seeks leave to appeal against the judgment, dated 21-3-2005, of a learned Division Bench of the Lahore High Court, Rawalpindi, Bench, whereby Criminal Appeal No,155 of 2002 filed by him was dismissed and conviction and sentence under section 9(c) of the Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997, to imprisonment for life with a fine of Rs,1,00,000 or in default of payment of fine to further undergo one year's S.I. Awarded by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Attock, was maintained. He was, however, awarded benefit of section 382-B, Cr.P.C.
2. Precisely, the case of the prosecution is that on 17-5-2000, the Excise staff, while on patrolling, stopped a Flying Coach. No,C-2294/Peshawar coming from Peshawar side at about 5-00 p.m. In which the petitioner was travelling. On suspicion, he was deboarded and was subjected to search and from the four pockets of his Saluka, 12 bundles of Charas weighing 12000 grams were recovered. From every bundle small quantity was taken and total 500 grams was separated for the purpose of chemical analysis.
3. After usual investigation, the challan was submitted in the trial Court. The charge was framed against the petitioner to which he did not plead guilty.
4. In order to establish the case, the prosecution examined in all five witnesses namely, Muhammad Maqbool H.C. P.W.1, Tajmulla P.W.2, Mubdar Hussain Shah P.W.3, Muhammad Abbas P.W.4 and Munsab Khan, A.S.-I. P.W.5.
5. The petitioner, in his statement recorded under section 342, Cr.P.C., while replying to question No,3 has said that as a matter of fact only 2000 grams of Charas was recovered from him but the P.Ws. Showing their efficiency planted 10,000 grams of Charas upon him He did not examine himself on oath as required under section 340(2), Cr.P.C. However, in defence he produced Dr. Shahid as D.W.I.
6. No one is present on behalf of the petitioner, though called. However, with the assistance of Mr. Dil Muhammad Tarar, learned Advocate Supreme Court for the State, we have gone through the record and proceedings of the case and the impugned judgment.
7. Admission of recovery of 2000 grams of Charas from his possession at the time of framing of charge amply proved the case of the prosecution when he was apprehended along with the contraband, such admission in view of the provisions of section 342, Cr.P.C. Is sufficient to convict the petitioner even in absence of any other evidence. Instead, he was afforded a full opportunity to rebut the case of prosecution but could not do so, though a complete trial took place and he was granted an opportunity to cross-examine the prosecution witnesses. Glaringly he in his statement under section 342, Cr.P.C. Reiterated the said stance and admitted about the recovery of 2000 grams Charas from his possession. According to his own admission referred above 2000 grams of Charas was said to have been recovered from his possession for which too one of the sentences is imprisonment for life. But in this case prosecution has fully established its case beyond shadow of doubt and two Courts below have concurred that he has committed the crime, as such, we do not find any justification to interfere with the same.
8. Accordingly, while maintaining the conviction and sentence awarded by trial Court and upheld by the learned High Court the petition being devoid of merit is dismissed and leave to appeal refused.