' KHALIL-UR-REHMAN RAMDAY, f.---Seventeen kilograms of Charas had been allegedly recovered from the respondent. According to the impugned order of the learned High Court, samples were taken from the said narcotic substance which were then sent for examination and the result of the said examination had since been received.
2, Despite this, the learned High Court ordered drawing of fresh samples from the parcels lying in the Malkhana for their examination afresh without any reason being disclosed for the same and only because the learned counsel for the accused had submitted that if the said narcotic substance was re-tested then it would disclose that the same did not contain Charas.
3. The State is before us questioning the said order. The learned Advocate Supreme Court for the State-petitioner has been heard. The learned Advocate-on-Record for the respondent has also been heard and we have also examined the record in the light of the submissions made before us.
4. Instances are not unknown and are in fact increasing by the day, where unscrupulous litigants manoeuver replacement of the substances and articles deposited in the Malkhana then make prayer for the reexamination of the substance and the result obviously is that the narcotic substance which had already been examined/tested as a narcotic substance was found to be something else. Such an immoral practice was gaining momentum as a result whereof the criminals were securing their acquittal through dishonest means. It was about time the learned Courts came alive to the said clandestine modus operandi adopted to screen offenders and made sure that once a substance had been tested then extraordinary reasons must exist and must be given before directing fresh examination of such a substance.
5. Since no such reasons had been disclosed by the learned High Court through the impugned order, therefore, the said order cannot be sustained. Consequently, this petition is converted into an appeal which is allowed as a result whereof the impugned order dated 24-1-2006 passed in Criminal Appeal No,396 of 2005 is set aside.. No orders as to costs.