| Case ID |
1784e184-b7a2-4d62-ad77-4731da18f7b4 |
| Body |
View case body. Login to View |
| Case Number |
Jail Petition No. 765 of 2017 |
| Decision Date |
Mar 08, 2022 |
| Hearing Date |
Mar 08, 2022 |
| Decision |
In the case of Subhan Ullah v. The State, the Supreme Court of Pakistan meticulously reviewed the prosecution's evidence under Section 9(c) of the Control of Narcotics Substances Act, 1997. The Court observed significant procedural lapses concerning the safe custody and transmission of narcotic samples. The prosecution failed to demonstrate that the narcotics were securely held in the Malkhana, as the individual responsible for this custody was not produced in court. Additionally, the official alleged to have transmitted the samples to the Forensic Science Laboratory was absent from the proceedings, rendering the prosecution's evidence insufficient. The absence of crucial evidence and lack of explanations for these omissions led the Court to grant the benefit of doubt to the accused. Consequently, the petition for leave to appeal was converted into an appeal, and Subhan Ullah was acquitted of all charges. He was ordered to be released from jail immediately, provided he was not required for any other legal proceedings. |
| Summary |
In the landmark case of Subhan Ullah versus The State, adjudicated by the Supreme Court of Pakistan on March 8, 2022, significant emphasis was placed on the integrity of evidence handling under the Control of Narcotics Substances Act, 1997. The petitioner, Subhan Ullah, faced serious charges under Section 9(c) concerning the possession and transportation of narcotics. However, the prosecution's inability to establish a secure chain of custody for the narcotic samples cast substantial doubt on the validity of the evidence presented. Key issues included the absence of the Malkhana responsible for safeguarding the samples and the individual alleged to have transmitted them to the Forensic Science Laboratory not being available for testimony. These lapses in procedural protocol undermined the prosecution's case, leading the judges—SARDAR TARIQ MASOOD, JUSTICE; QAZI MUHAMMAD AMIN AHMED, JUSTICE; and AMIN-UD-DIN KHAN, JUSTICE—to favor the defense's argument for benefit of doubt. Legal representation played a crucial role, with Advocate Arshad Hussain Yousafzai advocating for the petitioner and Ms. Aisha Tasneem representing the State as State Counsel for Khyber Pakhtunkhwa. The Court meticulously referenced precedents from cases like Amjad Ali v. The State and Ikramullah and others v. The State to reinforce the necessity of unblemished evidence in narcotics cases. Ultimately, the Supreme Court's decision to acquit Subhan Ullah not only highlighted the paramount importance of evidence integrity in criminal proceedings but also set a precedent for future cases involving narcotics. This judgment underscores the judiciary's commitment to upholding justice and ensuring that convictions are firmly grounded in reliable and verifiable evidence. For individuals and legal professionals navigating the complexities of narcotics laws in Pakistan, this case serves as a pivotal reference point, emphasizing the critical need for meticulous evidence handling and adherence to legal standards. The decision also reflects the evolving landscape of narcotics legislation and its rigorous application by the Supreme Court to safeguard defendants' rights while addressing the challenges posed by narcotics-related offenses. As trends in narcotics enforcement continue to develop, this case remains a significant milestone in the judicial approach to ensuring fairness and accountability within Pakistan's legal system. |
| Court |
Supreme Court of Pakistan
|
| Entities Involved |
The State,
Supreme Court of Pakistan,
Peshawar High Court,
Forensic Science Laboratory,
Subhan Ullah,
Police Station Hayatabad,
District Peshawar
|
| Judges |
SARDAR TARIQ MASOOD, JUSTICE,
QAZI MUHAMMAD AMIN AHMED, JUSTICE,
AMIN-UD-DIN KHAN, JUSTICE
|
| Lawyers |
Arshad Hussain Yousafzai, Advocate Supreme Court,
Ms. Aisha Tasneem, Advocate Supreme Court (as State Counsel, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa)
|
| Petitioners |
Subhanullah
|
| Respondents |
The State
|
| Citations |
2022 SLD 1042,
2022 SCMR 1052
|
| Other Citations |
Amjad Ali v. The State 2012 SCMR 577,
Ikramullah and others v. The State 2015 SCMR 1002,
Taimoor Khan and another v. The State and another 2016 SCMR 621,
The State through Regional Director ANF v. Imam Bakhsh and others 2018 SCMR 2039,
Khair-ul-Bashar v. The State 2019 SCMR 930
|
| Laws Involved |
Control of Narcotics Substances Act, 1997
|
| Sections |
9(c)
|