| Case ID |
234b0007-d279-444b-a6e6-bb4a705bc746 |
| Body |
View case body. Login to View |
| Case Number |
Criminal Jail Appeal No. 40 of 2001 |
| Decision Date |
Apr 20, 2006 |
| Hearing Date |
|
| Decision |
The appeal was allowed, and the conviction of the appellant under section 9(c) of the Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997, was overturned. It was determined that the prosecution failed to prove that the appellant had knowledge of the contraband items found in the oil tanker. The court noted significant contradictions in the testimonies of the prosecution witnesses, particularly regarding the timing of the events surrounding the arrest and the recovery of the narcotics. The discrepancies in the evidence indicated that the investigation was not conducted honestly, leading to the conclusion that the benefit of doubt must be given to the appellant. Consequently, the appellant was ordered to be released from jail if not required in any other case. |
| Summary |
In the case of Taj Muhammad vs. The State, the Sindh High Court deliberated on the appeal concerning a conviction under the Control of Narcotics Substances Act, 1997. The appellant, Taj Muhammad, was initially sentenced to life imprisonment for the transportation of 50 kgs of Charas and 25 kgs of Opium found in an oil tanker. The High Court scrutinized the evidence presented by the prosecution, highlighting critical inconsistencies in the testimonies of the arresting officers. Key issues included the timing of the departure of the excise staff, which contradicted the prosecution's narrative of the events leading to the arrest. The court emphasized the importance of credible evidence and the necessity of establishing the accused's knowledge of the contraband items. Given the lack of reliable evidence and the presence of material contradictions, the court granted the appellant the benefit of doubt, resulting in the overturning of the conviction. The decision underscores the legal standards required for criminal convictions, particularly in drug-related offenses, and the need for thorough and honest investigations by law enforcement agencies. |
| Court |
Sindh High Court
|
| Entities Involved |
|
| Judges |
ZIA PERWAZ,
SYED ZAWWAR HUSSAIN,
JAFFERI,
AMIR HANI MUSLIM
|
| Lawyers |
|
| Petitioners |
TAJ MUHAMMAD
|
| Respondents |
THE STATE
|
| Citations |
2008 SLD 2105,
2008 MLD 797
|
| Other Citations |
M. Ismail v. State PLD 1970 Kar. 261,
Latif v. State 1992 PCr.LJ 116,
Loung v. State 1999 PCr.LJ 595,
Abdul Sattar v. State 2002 PCr.LJ 51,
Ashiq Hussain v. State 2001 PCr.LJ 1736,
Zahoor Ahmed Awan v. The State 1997 SCMR 543
|
| Laws Involved |
Control of Narcotics Substances Act, 1997
|
| Sections |
9(c)
|