IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH CIRCUIT COURT

LARKANA

Criminal Appeal No. D- 57 of 2023.

PRESENT:

Justice Khadim Hussain Tunio.

Justice Shamsuddin Abbasi.

Appellant:                             Khursheed Ahmed, through Mr. Noorullah Rind, Advocate.

Respondent:                          The State, through Aitbar Ali Bullo, D.P.G.

Dates of hearing:                  03.10.2023.

Date of the judgment:          12.10.2023.

JUDGMENT

Shamsuddin Abbasi, J:- Through captioned appeal, appellant Khursheed Ahmed son of Ghulam Shabir Kori has challenged the vires of judgment dated 11.08.2023, passed by the learned Sessions Judge/ Special Judge for (CNS),  Kamber-Shahdadkot, in Special Case No. 151 of 2022 (hereunder referred to as ‘impugned judgment’), emanating from Crime No. 85 of 2022, registered at Police Station Sijawal, whereby he has convicted the appellant for offence under Section 9 (c) of Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997, and sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for one year and to pay fine of Rs.5000/- and in default whereof to undergo S.I for period of one month more, with the benefit of Section 382-B,Cr.PC.

2.         The case of prosecution as depicted from para 2 of the impugned judgment, reads as under:

            “That on 15.10.2022 at about 1000 hours at Arzi Bhutto-Bakhshal Sario road near Nourang Wah situated in Deh Arzi Bhutto and Taluka Sijawal, accused Khursheed Kori was arrested by police party of P.S Sijawal headed by ASI Munawar Ali Sario, who recovered 1200-grams of charas from his possession in presence of mashirs, namely, Sultan Ahmed (head constable) and Abid Hussain (Constable).”  

3.         After conducting investigation, the investigation officer submitted challan before the learned trial Court, whereafter it framed a charge against the accused, to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

4.         The prosecution in order to prove the charge against the accused examined PW-1 ASI Munawar Ali Sario (complainant/ I.O) and PW-2 P.C  Abid Hussain (mashir/witness of recovery). PW-3 WASI Nek Muhammad and P.C Nadir Ali. They produced various documents in their evidence. Thereafter, prosecution side was closed.

5.         Statement of accused under S. 342 Cr.PC was recorded, in which he denied all the allegations levelled against him by the prosecution and pleaded his innocence. The accused neither examined himself on oath as provided under section 340 (2) Cr.P.C., nor examined any witnesses in his defence.

6.         After hearing the learned counsel for the respective parties, learned trial Court convicted the appellant as stated above, hence this appeal.

7.         Learned counsel for the appellant argued that none from public was made witness to any of the proceedings of the case; that ocular account in the evidence comes from interested witnesses which is full of material contradictions; that the descriptions of the charas is not disclosed and that the safe custody and transmission of contraband is doubtful. Lastly, learned counsel prayed for grant of appeal acquittal of the appellant. 

8.         That, on the other hand learned D.P.G. supported the impugned judgment while arguing that the appellant was caught hold red handed with contraband charas and that no any malafide or ill-will was proved against the prosecution witnesses.

9.         We have heard the learned counsel for the respective parties and perused the record available before us.

10.       After a careful perusal of the evidence of witnesses, we have found that they have constituted an uninterrupted chain of facts ranging from seizure to forensic analysis of the contraband. They are in comfortable unison on all the salient features regarding interception of the charas as well as all the steps taken subsequently. No enmity or malafide on the part of the police was alleged or proved by the appellant. Prosecution has established their case on the pint of safe custody and safe transmission through P.W Nek Muhammad and PW/ P.C Nadir Hussain, as they produced copy of entry book of register-19, dated 15.10.2022, as well as R.C. Out of 1200 grams charas, 200 grams was sealed and sent to the chemical examiner, which is found by us being exercise more than sufficient to constitute forensic proof, therefore, he was responsible for the said narcotics. We have also examined the report of Chemical Examiner available on the record and have also found that it fully corroborates the evidence of both the witnesses, whose stand is in nexus with the chemical examiner’s report. Safe custody and dispatch of the contraband has also been proved. The prosecution witnesses have supported each other and no material contradiction was pointed out in their testimonies. No dent was created in the credibility of the prosecution witnesses. The simple defence plea taken by the appellant, does not appeal to a prudent mind. When the defence plea is juxtaposed with the prosecution version, the prosecution version inspires more confidence, as against defence plea.

11.       In view of the foregoing, we find no reason to interfere with the impugned judgment passed by the learned trial Court. Consequently, the appeal in hands being devoid of merits stands dismissed.

Judge

                                  Judge

Ansari