KHADIM HUSSAIN TUNIO, J.---Through .captioned criminal appeal, the appellants Lal Muhammad son of Abdul Ghafoor and Sirajuddin son of Jamal have challenged the judgment dated 21.03.2020 (impugned judgment) passed by Model Criminal Trial Court/1st Additional Sessions Judge, Karachi-West in Special Narcotics Case No. 39 of 2020, outcome of FIR bearing Crime No. 173/2019 registered with Police Station CTD Garden, Karachi for the offence punishable under sections 6/9(C) of the Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997 (CNSA, 1997). Through the impugned judgment, the appellants were convicted and sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for life and to pay fine of Rs.100,000/- each, in default whereof to suffer further imprisonment for one year more; although benefit of section 382(b) was extended to them.
2. Brief facts of the prosecution case are that on 27.09.2019, the complainant SIP Aijaz Ahmed Butt received spy information regarding one Haji Noor Muhammad Achakzai, an international narcotics peddler smuggling a huge quantity of narcotics to Karachi, hiding the same in secret shelves of a Hino Truck bearing Registration No. NAC-645. Upon receiving the said information, SIP Aijaz Ahmed Butt informed his higher-ups and then prepared a raiding party. The raiding party established a checkpoint at Northern Bypass adjacent to RTM builders and started checking on-coming vehicles, eventually spotting the truck disclosed to SIP Aijaz. They apprehended the drivers of the truck, who disclosed their names as Lal Muhammad Achakzai and Sirajuddin. After a quick interrogation, both the drivers admitted the presence of narcotics within secret shelves and claimed to be delivering the same for Haji Noor Muhammad. When the outer layer of the truck was opened, four shelves were revealed. From the first shelf, the raiding party recovered 35 packets of charas, weight on electronic scale came out to be 1002 to 1024 grams, totalling to 40 kilograms of charas. From the second shelf, they recovered 90 packets of charas, weight of each packet on an electronic scale came out to be approximately 520 grams, totalling to 24 kilograms. From the third shelf, total 35 packets of charas were recovered, weight of each packet on an electronic scale came out to be 1002 to 1024 grams, totalling to 40 kilograms and the last shelf, total 90 packets of charas, each weighing approximately 520 grams, totalling to 24 kilograms were recovered. A grand total of 176 kilograms of charas within 250 packets were recovered and the whole case property was sealed on the spot. Both the appellants were arrested and then along with the case property were brought back to the police station where FIR was lodged.
3. On conclusion of investigation, a challan was submitted against the appellants whereafter a formal charge was framed against them by the trial Court to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. Prosecution examined four witnesses in order to establish the charge against the appellants namely PW-1 HC Jan Sher, PW-2 SIP Aijaz Butt the complainant and head of the raiding party, PW-3 Gulfraz, private mashir of arrest and recovery and lastly PW-4 SIP Mashooq Ali, the investigation officer and the official responsible for delivery of the narcotic substances. These prosecution witnesses produced a number of documents and other items in their evidence which were duly exhibited. Statements of accused were recorded under section 342, Cr.P.C. wherein they denied the allegations levelled against them and pleaded .their innocence and stated that police had arrested them in between the night of 22nd and 23rd September, 2019 from Nooriabad and that police had also caught another truck loaded with 300 to 350 kilograms charas from same place and after accepting bribe of Rs.6,000,000/- from the real smugglers, they involved the appellants in this case with some of the recovered charas from the other trucks. Police also demanded money from their master Baboo Goods Transport Company and on his refusal to pay the same they were booked in this case. However, they neither examined themselves on oath nor produced any evidence in their defence to disprove. the charge.
4. Trial Court, after considering the material available before it and hearing the counsel for respective parties, passed the impugned judgment and sentenced the appellants as stated supra.
5. Learned counsel for the appellants has contended that the judgment passed by the trial court is perverse, shocking and against the criminal administration of justice; that the trial Judge while awarding the conviction has not considered the material contradictions made in the evidence of the PWs; that the alleged narcotics were managed and foisted on the appellants; that there is three days' delay in sending the samples to the chemical examiner; that the appellants were falsely implicated in this case; that safe custody of the narcotics has not been established and proper protocols were not followed by the chemical examiner in conducting the tests. In support of his contentions, he has placed reliance on the case law reported as Abdul Hameed v. The State (2016 SCMR 707) and Khair-ul-Bashar v. The State (2019 SCMR 930).
6. Conversely, learned Additional Prosecutor-General supported the impugned judgment while arguing that the appellants were apprehended after receipt of spy information and upon their apprehension, both of them pointed out the secret cavities in the Hino Truck one by one and got recovered the narcotic contraband; that the offence committed by the appellants is a heinous one and against the society; that the property was deposited with the office of the Chemical Examiner promptly and PW-3 PC Malik Shahid who delivered the same has been examined; that the burden of proving false implication shifted upon the shoulder of the appellants in view of provisions of Section 29 of CNS Act; that contradictions, if any in the evidence of the PWs, are minor in nature; that safe custody of the narcotic substance from recovery to dispatch for chemical examination has been proved by the prosecution; that the prosecution witnesses have fully implicated the present appellants, as such he prays that the instant criminal appeal, being meritless, be dismissed. He has placed reliance on the case law reported as Mehboob-ur-Rehman v. The State (2010 MLD 481), Ghulam Qadir v. The State (PLD 2006 SC 61), Haji Qasim Khan v. The State through DAG (2020 SCMR 1255) and Ibrarullah v. The State (2021 SCMR 128).
7. We have heard the arguments advanced by both the learned counsel for the appellants as well as learned Additional Prosecutor and have gone through the entire evidence available on the record.
8. It is admitted that SIP Aijaz received information regarding the smuggling of a huge quantity of narcotics on which he informed his superiors. According to the informer, the smuggling was done through a truck bearing Registration No.NAC-645. Upon receiving such information, he prepared a raiding party, reached North Bypass near RTM builders and spotted the truck which was signalled to stop. The appellants stopped the vehicle, whereafter their names were inquired to which they answered accordingly. When they were inquired about the presence of narcotics in the truck, they admitted the presence of hidden shelves within the side body of the truck. Police discovered a total of 250 packets of charas from four distinctive shelves, two containing 90 packets each and the other two containing 35 packets each. The total weight of the charas was found to be 176 kilograms. SIP Aijaz sealed the recovered contraband together after separating the 180 (90 from one shelf, 90 from the other) packets recovered from two shelves into 4 groups of 45 packets, totalling to 6 bags. These bags were then sealed together. The entire quantity was sent to the chemical examiner. The narcotic samples were sent through PW-4 SIP Mashooq Ali who has been examined and deposed in all respects as to how and when he delivered the parcels received by him. The initial information was received by the complainant on 27.09.2019 and the appellants were arrested on the same day at about 0015 hours. The sample for examination was sent to the chemical examiner on 30.09.2019, i.e. within 72 hours of the alleged recovery. PW-4 SIP Mashooq, to explain the delay in sending the narcotics to the chemical examiner, deposed that "I was given copy of FIR and other relevant documents along with case property consisting of charas in six bags and truck involved in the incident. On the same date I went to the Office of Chemical Examiner for depositing the case property but until then the Office Chemical Examiner had been closed as such I returned back, Then, on 27th being Friday, 28th Saturday and 29th Sunday, the Office of the Chemical Examiner was closed due to such holidays and I deposited the case property with his office on 30.09.2019." Seals on the same parcels delivered were found intact by the chemical examiner too who noted that condition of the seals was "satisfactory" which further proves safe custody and transmission of the same. Reliance, in this respect, is placed on the case of Zahid and another v. The State (2020 SCMR 590). We have also examined the report of Chemical Examiner available on record and found that it, fully corroborates the evidence of all the prosecution witnesses. All necessary protocols were followed in the Chemical Examiner's Report which further supports the prosecution case. Learned counsel for the appellants contended that not all protocols were followed by the Chemical Examiner which is incorrect as a perusal of the Chemical Examiner's Report shows all the tests that were carried out, the manner in which they were carried out, 10 grams consumed from each slap in analysis. In this respect, reliance is placed on the unreported judgment dated 0I.O3.2022 passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Criminal Petition No. 762 of 2018 (Abdul Rasool v. The State), wherein it was observed that:- "3. We have examined theforensic report that contains a detailed description of analysis undertaken by the chemical examiner by mentioned each test, carried out to confirm the narcotic character of the samples. Relevant witnesses appeared to establish safe custody of the contraband as well as transmission of samples to the laboratory; the argument does not hold water."
9. The prosecution witnesses have provided an uninterrupted chain of facts ranging from arrest and seizure to forensic analysis of the contraband. They are in comfortable unison on all the salient features regarding interception of the charas as well as all the steps taken thereafter. All the witnesses have unanimously deposed that the case property in Court is the same and were never cross-examined on this point by the defence at the time of trial. With regard to conscious possession, the three prime witnesses of the prosecution case, the complainant SIP Aijaz, PW-1 HC Jan Sher and PW-3 Gulfaraz who were the mashir of arrest and recovery, have deposed that both the appellants had pointed out the shelves in the truck and they were never cross-examined on this aspect of the case either. As such, the prudent presumption here would be that both the appellants were well aware of the contents of the truck and the presence of narcotics. Contraband so recovered from the appellants has been proved by examining the complainant PW-1 HC Jan Sher who was the mashir of arrest and recovery, PW-2 complainant and head of the raiding party SIP Aijaz and PW-3 Gulfaraz, an independent witness.
10. With regard the contention regarding the evidence of the police officials being not trustworthy and unworthy of any credence, this contention has very little merit to it. Even though there is no universal rule that evidence of an interested witness per se must be invariably corroborated by independent evidence, the complainant still went above and beyond by contacting PW-3 Gulfaraz an independent customs clearing agent. Police officials are still as good witnesses as any other private witness and theii0 evidence is subject to same standard of proof and principles of scrutiny as applicable to any other category of witnesses; in absence of any animus, infirmity or flaw in their evidence, their testimony can be relied upon without demur. Reliance is placed on the case of Hussain Shah and others v. The State (PLD 2020 Supreme Court 132). Their evidence still found independent corroboration by PW-3 Gulfaraz against whom the appellants have been unable to allege or prove any animus. As far as the contention of the learned counsel for the appellants regarding the investigation officer not involving the owner of the truck namely Dad Muhammad son of Pir Muhammad is concerned, the same does not affect the evidence brought on record against the appellants nor does it affect their role in the commission of the offence, as such this contention merits no consideration. Learned counsel for the appellants also pointed out the deposition of the I.O. wherein he admits the registration of a false case against them. We perused the same and found that it was not pertaining to the present case, the Investigation Officer SIP Mashooq merely noted that on 02.10.2019, he was called by ANF Officials in relation to a separate FIR bearing Crime No. 33/2019 registered at Police Station ANF Mohammad Ali Society and with regard to that FIR, he stated that the same was false and that the ANF officials also inquired about the incident of the present case. Such a deposition has no bearing on this case which was for a separate incident and has been established fully by the prosecution.
11. So far the defence plea raised by the appellants is concerned, appellants have claimed to be arrested from Nooriabad after the complainant allegedly took a bribe and let the real culprits go from whom 300 to 350 kilograms were recovered. No animus has been proved against the prosecution or the complainant. Suffice it to say that nothing was brought on record to suggest that the appellants were not arrested by the police from the truck as per the evidence. Mere assertion of appellants that they had been involved falsely in the narcotics case, in absence of any tangible evidence, was of no consequence nor did it create any doubt about the recovery of narcotics. Lal Muhammad even admitted his presence in the said truck and claimed he was delivering wheat bags in his statement under section 342, Cr.P,C. The appellants were bound to establish the defence plea of false implication through their arrest prior to the actual incident as agitated by them through adducing tangible evidence and such allegation in absence of sound evidence, could not be considered in view of Article 121 of Qanun-e-Shahadat, 1984. It was observed by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Anwar Shamim and another v. The State (2010 SCMR 1791) that it is duty and obligation of an accused person to prove the plea taken by them in their defence in terms of Article 121 of Qanun-e-Shahadat, 1984. More so, section 29 of CNSA, 1997, casts burden upon an accused to establish their innocence and absolve themselves from the allegations of the recovered substance.
Prosecution only has to show, by tangible evidence, that accused have dealt with narcotics substance or have had physical custody of it or were directly concerned with it, unless accused prove by preponderance of probability that they did not knowingly or consciously possess the articles; without such proof, accused can be held guilty by virtue of section 29 of the CNSA, 1997.
Thus, prosecution has successfully discharged its burden in proving the recovery of the narcotics from the appellants Lal Muhammad and Sirajuddin.
12. For what has been discussed above, we find that the prosecution has undoubtedly proven the guilt of the appellants beyond reasonable shadow of doubt. Therefore, conviction and sentence awarded to the appellants, vide impugned judgment, are upheld. Accordingly, instant criminal appeal, being devoid of any merit, is dismissed.