| Case ID |
158106ea-f569-4e4b-8224-e8b917735b45 |
| Body |
View case body. Login to View |
| Case Number |
Criminal Appeals Nos. 494 and 55 of 2013 |
| Decision Date |
Apr 09, 2014 |
| Hearing Date |
Apr 09, 2014 |
| Decision |
The Lahore High Court dismissed the appeals of Ghulab Ali and Gohar Ali, affirming their conviction under Section 9(c) of the Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997. The court found that the prosecution had established the recovery of a substantial quantity of narcotics, specifically 77 kilograms of charas and 13.5 kilograms of opium, from the appellants. The court ruled that the evidence presented, including the testimonies of police officials, was credible and consistent. The appellants' claims of false implication and procedural violations were deemed unsubstantiated, and the court emphasized that the intent of the law was to combat drug trafficking effectively, allowing for minor procedural discrepancies to be overlooked. As a consequence, the appeals were dismissed, and the convictions were upheld. |
| Summary |
In the case of Ghulab Ali alias Ghulabo and Gohar Ali vs. The State, the Lahore High Court addressed serious charges under the Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997. The appellants were implicated in a significant drug trafficking operation involving large quantities of narcotics. During the trial, evidence was presented showcasing the recovery of charas and opium, which was meticulously documented by law enforcement officials. The court noted the absence of credible defense from the appellants, who claimed false accusations based on prior records. The ruling emphasized the need for stringent enforcement against drug-related offenses, highlighting that minor procedural issues should not undermine the overarching goal of combating drug trafficking. The decision serves as a precedent in narcotics law, reinforcing the reliance on police testimony in the absence of civilian witnesses, particularly in drug-related cases, where public reluctance to testify is a recognized challenge. This case is pivotal in shaping judicial approaches towards narcotics enforcement and the evidentiary standards required in such trials. |
| Court |
Lahore High Court
|
| Entities Involved |
Not available
|
| Judges |
Zafarullah Khan Khakwani,
Syed Iftikhar Hussain Shah
|
| Lawyers |
Muhammad Masood Chishti,
Iftikhar ul Haq Chaudhry,
Aftab Inspector
|
| Petitioners |
Ghulab Ali alias Ghulabo,
Gohar Ali
|
| Respondents |
The State
|
| Citations |
2014 SLD 2465,
2014 PCRLJ 1649
|
| Other Citations |
Salah ud Din v. The State 2010 SCMR 1962,
Ismaeel v. The State 2010 SCMR 27,
Mst. Nur Jehan Begum through Legal Representatives v. Syed Mujtaba Ali Naqvi 1991 SCMR 2300
|
| Laws Involved |
Control of Narcotic Substances Act (XXV of 1997),
Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984)
|
| Sections |
9(c),
132,
133
|