IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, CIRCUIT COURT, LARKANA

Before:

Mr. Justice Omar Sial

Mr. Justice Khalid Hussain Shahani

Criminal Jail Appeal No.D-48 of 2024

Ahsan Ali Noon

V/S

The State

Appellant:                                          Ahsan Ali son of Sanwal Bux Noon

Through Mr. Muhammad Afzal Jagirani,

Advocate.

State:                                                  Through Mr. Ali Anwar Kandhro, Additional

Prosecutor General, Sindh.

Date of Hearing:                               20.02.2025

Date of Decision:                             06.03.2025

J U D G M E N T

Omar Sial, J.-  A police party at the Lakhi Ghulam Shah police station was on routine patrol on 26.03.2024 when it saw a man standing on the road with a black plastic bag. The man was detained and identified as Ahsan Ali (the appellant). 1000 grams of charas were recovered from the plastic bag he held. Ahsan was arrested, and F.I.R. No. 29 of 2024 was registered under section 9(3)(c) of the Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997.

2.         A.S.I. Ghulam Abid Unar (the complainant) was the first prosecution witness. H.C. Gulsher Ahmed witnessed the arrest and recovery and was the second prosecution witness. The case's investigating officer, S.I. Liaquat Ali Naper, was the third witness examined. The fourth prosecution witness was P.C. Asif Hussain, who took the seized narcotics from the police station to the Chemical Analyst. The Maalkhaana In Charge, W.H.C. Salahuddin Mahar, was the fifth prosecution witness.

3.         Learned counsel for the appellant has argued that the safe custody of the seized narcotics was not proved at trial. Therefore, the conviction could not be sustained. The argument is misconceived as the Maalkhana In Charge and the courier were examined at trial.

4.         In several cases, we have noted that the trial court's recording of section 342 Cr.P.C. statement is not proper. Entire evidence has been reproduced in lengthy questions. A common man would not understand the evidence against him, and therefore, his right to a fair trial is impacted. The trial court has recorded the statement arbitrarily and mechanically, and it appears that no importance has been attached to this critical trial stage. A mere formality has been fulfilled. The learned Additional Prosecutor General submits that to ensure a fair trial, it would be appropriate that the case be remanded back for a fresh recording of the section 342 Cr.P.C. statement.

5.         Given the above, the impugned judgment is set aside. The case is remanded back to the trial court to record the section 342 Cr.P.C. afresh and ensure that small and simple questions which the appellant can understand are asked of him. The trial court should also ensure that witness statements are recorded verbatim and that the testimony of one witness is not reproduced for another with minor amendments made. If it is pointed out to the trial court that the witness statement has been copied, the court shall re-examine that witness afresh.  Fresh judgment is to be rendered after the exercise is completed.

Appeal stands disposed of in the above terms.

Judge

Judge

Manzoor