' Mst. Ghulam Sakina, wife of Zafar Iqbal, caste Kalwar, aged 27 years, resident of Mohallah Kalwaran, Sliahpur Sadar, District Sargodha, has through this appeal impugned the validity of the judgment of the learned Magistrate, invested with powers under section 30 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, Shahpur, dated the 4th May, 1992, whereby the appellant was convicted of allegedly transporting 500 grams of heroin and was sentenced under Article 3 of the Prohibition (Enforcement of Hadd) Order, 1979 (President's Order No,4 of 1979), to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three years, suffer ten stripes of whipping and pay of fine of Rs,10,000 and in default of payment thereof to pass further rigorous imprisonment for six months. The prosecution version of the case involving the appellant runs in the following fashion. On the 8th July, 1991, at about 2-00 p.m., Karim Nawaz Khan, Inspector Incharge of Anti-Narcotics Staff, Sargodha, P.W.1, with the aid of Abdul Sattar, Inspector of Police and Station House Officer, Police Station Shahpur Sadar, Dost Muhammad, Sub-Inspector of Police, Police Station, Shahpur Sadar, P.W.4 and other police officials, in pursuance of drive against narcotics dealers, stopped motor car bearing Registration No,KB 2151 coming from Khushab side at railway-cum-road bridge on Jhelum river. The car was driven by Abdul Khaliq and the owner of the car, Hidayat Ullah, was occupying the front seat with the chauffeur. The appellant, Mst. Ghulam Sakina, clad in a Burqa, was sitting on the rear seat. Search carried out by Karim Nawaz Khan, P.W.1 yielded six kilograms of opium from Hidayat Ullah, five kilograms of Charas from Abdul Khaliq and 500 grams of heroin from the appellant. The appellant Hidayat Ullah and Abdul Khaliq were separately challaned and tried.
2. Karim Nawaz Khan extracted a sample of ten grams from 500 grams of heroin recovered from the possession of the appellant and made it into a sealed parcel. The remaining quantity of heroin was covered into another sealed packet. Both these packets were taken possession of by Karim Nawaz Khan vide the memorandum, Exh. PA, which was attested by Dost Muhammad, P.W. 4 and Rab Nawaz Khan, Assistant Sub-Inspector of Police of the Anti-Narcotics Staff, Sargodha (not produced). Karim Nawaz Khan drafted the report of the incident, Exh.PB, and on its basis case against the appellant was registered at Police Station, Shahpur Sadar.
3. The sample on analysis by the Chemical Examiner for the Punjab, Rawalpindi, was found, per report, Exh.PD, to contain heroin which could cause intoxication.
4. The appellant denied possession and transportation of heroin as alleged by the prosecution. She described the case against her to be a false one. She did not examine herself on oath nor she produced any evidence in defence.
5. The learned trial Court accepted the testimony of Karim Nawaz Khan, P.W.1 and Dost Muhammad, P.W.4, to hold the appellant to be guilty of the commission of offence of transporting heroin and accordingly convicted and sentenced her as indicated in the beginning of the judgment.
6. The learned counsel for the appellant brought to the notice of this Court a disturbing feature of the case which escaped the notice of the learned trial Court. Karim Nawaz Khan, P.W.1 and Dost Muhammad, P.W.4, had long standing blood feud with Hidayat Ullah, the owner of Car No KB-2151.
Their relatives had been involved in cross murder cases and quite a few of them hal been awarded capital punishment. In face of such a situation the plea or Hidayat Ullah and Abdul Khaliq that they had been falsely implicated due to previous enmity with Karim Nawaz Khan and Dost Muhammad was give weight by the learned Courts before whom their cases came up for hearing They were given benefit of the doubt and were acquitted. The learned counsl for the appellant sought to take benefit of the development in those cases for the appellant in the instant appeal. If cases against Hidayat Ullah and Abd Khaliq were not accepted at face value it would not be proper to hold to appellant, who was travelling in the same car and was said to have been caughat the same moment alongwith Hidayat Ullah and Abdul Khaliq, to be guilty possession or transportation of narcotics beyond a reasonable manner doubt. She cannot be treated differently. She is also entitled to the benefit doubt. Consequently the appeal is accepted, her conviction and senter awarded to her are set aside and she is acquitted. She is on bail. She She is discharged of the obligations attending to the bail bonds executed by her.