' SHAHJI RAHMAN KHAN, J.--- This judgment shall dispose of Criminal Appeal No,456 of 2007 filed by Munawar Hussain appellant and Criminal Appeal No, 459 of 2007 filed by Muhammad Ishfaq appellant against their conviction and sentence recorded by learned Judge Special Court. (C.N.S.)
Peshawar Camp- Kohat because both the matters have arisen out of judgment dated 11-6-2007 whereby both the appellants were convicted under section 9(c) of the Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997 and sentenced to imprisonment for life and fine of Rs,500,000 each or in default to suffer simple imprisonment for two years each. The benefit of section 382-B, Cr.P.C. Was extended to them.
2. Brief facts of the case are that on 26-1-2006 Inspector Nasir Iqbal P.W.3 along with other A.N.P.
Staff on prior information that on night intervening 26-1-2006 and 27-1-2006 contraband will be smuggled in Truck No,AE-0195 Hyderabad towards Punjab, proceeded towards collective check post Indus High way at Kohat in official vehicle and on arrival there, they started routine checking and also laid a secret picket. The said Nasir Iqbal Inspector deputed Abdul Qiyas L.H.C. At under construction Tool Plaza situated at a distance of 500 meters from check post towards Darra Adamkhel for conveying wireless message about the arrival of the said Truck AE-0195 Hyderabad and five minutes before the occurrence the required communication was conveyed. Inspector Nasir Iqbal stopped the truck wherein Abdul Qiyas LHC also reached there. The driver of the Truck disclosed his name as Munawar Hussain son of Muhammad Hayat while the person occupying front seat being cleaner of the truck disclosed his name as Muhammad Ishfaq son of Muhammad Ranjah both residents of Jehanyan District Khanewal. The truck along with the accused was brought to the Police. Station where, in presence and on pointation of the accused from the secret cavities in cabin on roof of the truck 252 packets of baked Charas, 10 packets of raw Charas and 26 packets of opium were recovered and weighed. The baked Charas was found 300 Kgs., raw. Charas 13 Kgs. While opium was found to be 32 Kgs. Inspector Nasir Iqbal P.W.3 separated sample of 10 grams from each packet of baked Charas and sealed it into parcel numbering 252. Similarly, he separated sample of 10 grams from each packet of raw Charas which he sealed into parcel No,253 to parcel No,262 and also he separated samples of 10 grams from each packet of opium and sealed it into parcels Nos.263 to 288 for transmitting of it to the chemical analyzer, while rest of the contraband was sealed into separate bag numbering 9. He also recovered registration permit part "B" from the dash board and took into possession all the aforesaid articles vide memo. Exh.P.W.3/1.
He registered F.I.R. No,3 under, section 9(c), C.N.S.A. In the police station Exh.P.W.3/2 and handed over the case property, samples and the application to the Moharrir for safe custody and dispatching samples to F.S.L. Thereafter, he recorded statements of P. Ws. As the accused had disclosed that Zainuddin son of Kamaluddin resident of Sultan Khel Mianwali was the owner of the truck and the stuff, so he searched for him but he was avoiding his arrest, therefore, proceedings under section 204 and thereafter proclamation under section 87, Cr.P.C. Were initiated and after completion of required investigation he handed over the case file to Inspector S.H.O. Riaz Ali Khan P.W.2 who prepared complete challan in this case and submitted the same in the Trial Court on 26- 6-2006.
3. The prosecution in order to prove the charge and substantiate the allegation levelled against the appellants produced 5 (five) witnesses at the trial. Summary of the prosecution evidence for just and proper appraisal is reproduced as under:--- ' Rafi Ullah H.C. (P.W.1) had handed over the sample in this case to Muhammad Hanif F.C. For onward delivery to F.S.L. Rawalpindi. Riaz Ali Khan S.H.O. P.W.2 has submitted complete challan against the appellants in the trial Court. Inspector Nasir Iqbal is complainant as well as Investigating Officer in this case. He has appeared at the trial as P.W.3 and furnished ocular account of the prosecution case, the details of which had already been reproduced while narrating the facts of the case. Masood Khan A.S.-I. A.N.F. Is P.W.4 and is marginal witness of recovery of the Charas vide recovery memo. Exh.P.W.1/3 and has confirmed the investigation conducted by complainant Nasir Iqbal P.W.3. Muhammad Hanif F.C. A.N.F., Kohat P.W.5 deposed that he took sample in case to FSL at Rawalpindi.
4. On conclusion of the prosecution evidence, the appellants were examined under section 342, Cr.P.C. And the entire incriminating circumstances appeared against them were put to them in order to get their explanation about the same but they denied the charge and professed innocence and false implication in the case and opted not to record their statements on oath in terms of section 340(2), Cr.P.C. And did not produce evidence in their defence. The learned trial Court after hearing the parties and appraising the evidence convicted and sentenced the appellants in the terms above stated. Feeling dissatisfied with their conviction and sentences, the appellants have come to this Court by way of the present two appeals.
5. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the record with their valuable assistance.
6. The learned counsel for the appellants argued with vehemence that there is no evidence against the appellants to connect them with the offence and that they have been implicated in a concocted case despite of non-recovery of Charas and opium from their personal possession.
That the prosecution case is full of material contradictions, grave discrepancies and because of lack of disinterested witnesses no reliance can be placed on the said evidence and the judgment based on artificial evidence is the result of misreading and non-reading of the evidence available on record. Therefore, the appellants are entitled to the benefit of doubt and on acceptance of their appeals, they be acquitted of the charge levelled against them.
7. As against that, the learned standing counsel appearing for the State (A. N. F.) supported the impugned judgment and submitted that huge quantity of contraband was recovered from the truck in control and possession of appellants and the plea of the, defence being an afterthought albeit not proved by recording of statement on oath or producing evidence in defence, therefore, the appeals being devoid of merits and substance be dismissed and the well reasoned judgment of the trial Court be upheld.
8. The contention of the learned counsel for the appellants that the recovery of the alleged contraband was not effected from the appellants is belied by the statement of Inspector Nasir Iqbal P.W.3 and Masood Khan A.S.-I. P.W.4, the latter being the official of A.N.F. Staff having accompanied the Investigating Officer/complainant at the relevant time, has fully supported each other on material particulars of the prosecution case that at 0100 hours of night on 27-1-2005 from Truck No,AE-0195 in possession and control of appellant recovery of 300 Kgs.. Pukhta Charas, .13 Kgs. Charas Garda and 32 Kgs. Opium was recovered from secret cavities thereof. The learned trial Court while appraising the evidence of the aforesaid P. Ws. Has held that the witnesses in their deposition have given a straightforward and confidence inspiring evidence and the defence despite lengthy cross-examination has failed to shatter their credibility in any way; that the appellants were arrested on the spot along with the contraband and the report of the F.S.L. In this regard is in the positive.
9. We after having meticulously analyzed the evidence found no material discrepancy in the statements of the prosecution witnesses and the appellants have not alleged any ill-well or grudge of the A.N.F. Officials for their false involvement. The well reasoned findings of the learned trial Court holding the appellants guilty of the charge is not open to any exception. Neither such huge quantity of the contraband can be planted by the, prosecution against the appellants nor material contradiction or discrepancy has been brought out on the record to shatter the credibility of the prosecution evidence. The prosecution witnesses have fully supported and corroborated its case with the confidence inspiring evidence and the appellants have miserably failed to prove their defence plea by producing evidence worth the name in support of their defence plea. Therefore, no interference is warranted in the well reasoned judgment of the learned trial Court.
10. For what has been discussed above, finding no merit or substance in the two appeals, the same are hereby dismissed.