RAUF AHMAD SHEIKH, J.---Muhammad Lawal appellant has assailed the vires of judgment dated 18-5-2004 passed by learned Judge, Special Court, Control of Narcotic Substances, Lahore, in case F.I.R. No.2 of 2003 dated 14-1-2003 under section 9(c) of the Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997, P.S. ANF, Lahore, whereby he was convicted under section 9(c) of the C.N.S.A., 1997 and sentenced to 14 years' R.I. With fi'ne of Rs.5,00,000 and in case of default thereof to undergo S.I. For one year.
2. Briefly stated the prosecution version as set-forth in the complaint (Exh.PE) submitted by Zahid Mahmood, Inspector, P.S. ANF, Lahore (subsequently reduced into formal F.I.R. Exh.PA) is that on a spy information received by the superior officers to the effect that Muhammad Lawal, a black African would make an attempt to smuggle heroin by concealing the same in stationery items through Flight No.KU-204 of Kuwait Air Lines, a raiding party comprising of the complainant, Muhammad Sheraz, A.S.-I., Muhammad Aslam, Constable SSG and Imdad. Hussain, Constable under the supervision of Major Shamshad Hussain Dar, Deputy Director was formed. They arrived at International Airport, Lahore, on official vehicle. During briefing of Flight No.204, Kuwait Air Lines, a black African arrived at ANF Counter at about 07:15 hours, who subsequently disclosed his name as Muhammad Lawal son of Aziz Lawal, resident of House No.141, Glower Street, Free Town, Seraleon and on search of his luggage 220 sticks of UHU Glue in addition to other stationery items were recovered from a suitcase of gray colour and on opening the UHU Glue Sticks, heroin was recovered from the same. It was extracted from the Sticks and collected, which on weighing was found to be 7.250 kilograms. 10 grams heroin was separated as sample. The sample and the remaining heroin along with 220 empty UHU Sticks were converted into separate sealed parcels and were secured through memo. Of recovery. The other articles and luggage along with Passport of the accused were secured through separate memos of recovery.
3. After investigation the accused was sent up to face the trial. He was charged under section 9(c) of the Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997. He pleaded not guilty and claimed the trial.
4. The prosecution has examined four witnesses in addition to the documentary evidence in support of its allegations. The complainant Rao Zahid Mahmood, Inspector/S.H.O., P.S. ANF, Lahore appeared as P.W.4 and almost reiterated the contents of the complaint (Exh.PE). Muhammad Sheraz, A.S.-I. (P.W.3) has stated that on search of the appellant, heroin was recovered from 220 Glue Sticks, which were kept by him along with other stationery items in a suitcase of gray colour.
Zahid Mahmood, Inspector cut down the Glue Sticks, collected the heroin, which was found to be 7.250 Kilograms on weighing. 10 grams heroin was separated as sample. Two separate sealed parcels were prepared, which were secured through memo. Of recovery (Exh.PB), whereas the other articles recovered from the appellant/accused were secured through memo. Of recovery (Exh.PC) and the currency notes and other articles recovered on his personal search were secured through memo of recovery (Exh.PD), which were attested by him and Muhammad Aslam P.W.
Muhammad Sarwar, A.S.-I. (P.W.2) stated that on 14-1-2003 he recorded formal F.I.R. (Exh.PA) on the basis of complaint sent by Rao Zahid Mahmood, Inspector through Imdad Hussain, Constable. He further stated that he kept the sealed parcels given to him on the same day in the Malkhana and handed over the parcel containing sample to Abdul Ghafoor, Constable. Muhammad Abdul Ghafoor (P.W.1) stated that on 16-1-2003 he received the sealed parcel containing sample and delivered it in the office of the Chemical Examiner on the same day.
5. The appellant in his statement under section 342, Cr.P.C. Stated that neither the suitcase nor UHU Sticks belonged to him. He stated that he was falsely implicated. He, however, opted neither to appear under section 340(2), Cr.P.C. Nor to produce the defence evidence.
6. We have heard the arguments advanced by Mr. Muhammad Siddique Ahmad Qadri, Advocate, learned counsel for the appellant and Mr. A.D. Nasim, Special Prosecutor, ANF and have also perused the record with their able assistance.
7. Learned counsel for the appellant has contended that according to P.W.3, the accused was seen coming towards the Counter whereas according to P.W.4 he reached at the Counter and then the search of his luggage was made; that according to one witness this search was taken on the ANF Counter whereas according to other witness it was near the Counter of Customs; Major Shamshad Dar, who was supervising the raiding party has not been produced; that there was no tag of PIA on the luggage of the appellant so it cannot be said with certainty that the same belonged to him especially when many residents of different African countries were travelling on the same flight and that only 10 grams heroin out of the total quantity weighing 7.250 Kilograms was sent for chemical examination so it is not certain that the total quantity allegedly recovered was heroin and that the sample was sent to the office of the Chemical Examiner with inordinate delay so the possibility of tampering with the parcel cannot be ruled out. Finally it is contended that the sentence awarded to the appellant, who is a helpless foreigner is very harsh and it may be reduced to the extent of the period already spent in the Jail, which is sufficient keeping in view the quantity of the narcotic substance recovered from him.
8. Learned Special Prosecutor, ANF, has vehemently opposed the appeal and controverted the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the appellant at the bar. It is urged that the appellant was caught red-handed and there was no reason for the complainant and P.W.3 to implicate him falsely and make false statements as they had no enmity or grouse against him.
9. Rao Zahid Mahmood (P.W.4) and Muhammad Sheraz Munawar (P.W.3) have categorically stated that on spy information a raiding party was formed and the search was conducted of the luggage of the appellant when he arrived in the Departure Lounge and from a gray suitcase 220 UHU Glue Sticks were found from which heroin weighing 7.250 Kilograms was recovered. The minor discrepancy as to the Counter where the search was conducted is immaterial because it has been stated by R.W.3 that the Counters of ANF and Customs are parallel to each other and,there is difference of only 2/3 feet between the same so the contention of the learned counsel for the appellant is without any force. It is stated that both the P.Ws. Deposed that the total heroin was amalgamated and then the sample was separated so the contention that only 10 grams heroin would not prove that the total quantity was heroin was also without force. Even otherwise the appellant has denied the factum of recovery so he cannot raise objection to the quantity and the sample sent for chemical examination. P.W.4 has admitted that he converted the sample into sealed parcel and P.W.2 has proved that he kept it in the Malkhana safely and handed it over to Muhammad Abdul Ghafoor (P.W.1) on 16-1-2003, who delivered the same in the office of the Chemical Examiner on the same ,day. The sample was forwarded within two days of its recovery so no delay was caused because the formalities vis docket, etc., are to be completed. Both P.Ws. 3 and 4 have no or animosity against the appellant. They have categorically stated that on search of suitcase the stationery items along with UHU Glue. Sticks containing heroin were recovered. The contention that the PIA tag was not affixed on the luggage is also without force because may be the bags were being carried as hand baggage and had yet not been cleared by the crew. The prosecution evidence available on the record inspires confidence and it is proved that the appellant was carrying heroin weighing 7.250 Kilograms with an intention to smuggle the same.
The learned trial Court properly appreciated the evidence and the findings recorded by it do not call for any interference.
10. The appellant was carrying heroin in order to smuggle it to some foreign country. These international smugglers have brought bad name to our country and have also put the future of the young generation in other countries at stake so they do not deserve any leniency. The sentence awarded to him by the learned trial Court is not excessive keeping in view the nature and quantity of narcotic substance recovered from him.
11. For the reasons supra, the appeal is without force and the same is hereby dismissed.