Saqlain S/O Syed Afzal vs The State
Balochistan High Court · 2025 · Before Hon'ble Justice Muhammad Najamuddin Mengal
Criminal Appeal No.500 of 2024 filed by the appellant (convict) Saqlain son of Syed Afzal, against the judgment dated 28th December 2024, (“the impugned judgment”) passed by learned Special Judge CNS/Additional Sessions Judge-II, Quetta (“the trial Court”), whereby the appellant was convicted under Section 9 (1) 3-(C) of Control of Narcotics Substances Act (Amended Act 2022) 1997 (“the CNS Act”) and sentenced to suffer imprisonment for a period of Nine (09) years R.I. with fine of Rs.80,000/- or in default thereof to further suffer S.I. for two (02) months, with the benefit of Section 382-B Cr.P.C.
2. Precise facts expressed in the appeal in hand are that on 4th January 2024, the complainant Naseer Ahmed, IP lodged FIR bearing No.05 of 2024 at PS Brewery, Quetta alleging therein that on the said date he alongwith other police personnel were on routine patrolling of the area, during the course whereof, the informer informed that a person, who deals with the business of contraband is presently having a huge quantity of Criminal Appeal No.500 of 2024 - 2 - Only for viewing purpose. Contact office for certified copy. narcotics and is present at last stop of Brewery Road, Quetta. Pursuant to such information, at about 08:40 p.m. when they reached at the said place, found a pedestrian in suspicious condition, who on seeing the raiding team tried to escape, but was overpowered by the police officials. On query, he disclosed his name as Saqlain son of Syed Afzal. His personal search was conducted, which was resulted into recovery of two slabs of Charas weighing 1100-gream and 700-grams total weighing 1800-grams of Charas being tied around his chest with a cloth, thus out of which 10/10-grams from each slab were separated and sealed in parcel Nos.1 to 2 for chemical analysis, while the remaining substances were sealed in parcel Nos.1-A & 2-A.
3. In pursuance of above FIR, the appellant was arrested, investigated and on completion thereof, he was challaned in the trial Court, which indicted the charge and on denial by the appellant, the prosecution produced Four (04) witnesses, whereafter the appellant was examined under Section 342 Cr.P.C. The appellant neither recorded his statement on oath under Section 340(2) Cr.P.C nor produced any witness in his defence. On conclusion of trial, the appellant was convicted and sentenced as mentioned above. Whereafter the instant appeal has been filed.
4. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the available record. Perusal of record transpires that it is a case of no evidence at all and the learned trial Court, while delivering the impugned judgment has reached to a wrong conclusion by awarding conviction and sentence to the appellant. Anyhow, the prosecution in order to establish the charge has produced the evidence of four witnesses, who have contradicted each other on material counts. Naseer Ahmed, IP is the complainant of the case, who Criminal Appeal No.500 of 2024 - 3 - Only for viewing purpose. Contact office for certified copy.
Opening of the judgment. Loading the full judgment on LexPK…