IN THE COURT OF CH.

ZIA ULLAH,
ADDL. SESSIONS JUDGE, JHANG

Sessions Case No.13/SC of 2011.

Sessions Trial No. of .

The State.

Vs.

Tasawar

CASE FIR NO.13. DATED 10.01.2011.

OFFENCE UNDER SECTION 302/109/34 PPC.
POLICE STATION MOCHIWALA, JHANG.

Date of Decision:27.02.2015.

JUDGMENT.

The above said accused was sent up by the

police to face the trial in a case FIR No.13 dated
10.01.2011 registered under section 302/109/34 PPC,
Police station Mochiwala, Jhang
2. The brief facts of the case as reported by
Ahmed Ali Nasir complainant of this case to the police
on 23.07.2013 are that he is resident of Chak No.212
JB Sargana and an entire employee of Education
Department. His Bhateeja Fazal Kareem who is serving
in Pakistan Army had came into his house on leave who
has contracted marriage with his own choice with Razia
Bibi d/o Jewan Khan. Fazal kareem on 11.07.2013
brought his wife to his house without the consent of
the parents of Razia Bibi and on 22.07.2013 the
complainant, his Bhateeja, Mst. Razia Bibi, Mazhar
Abbas s/o Anwar, Nausher Ali visited the house of
jewan Khan for settling a compromise in this regard as
Jewan Khan is their close relative and a Punchayat was
convened in which the discussion about compromise was
made and when they about to go to their house, jewan
Khan insisted and forced them to stay there due to
 2

late. At this the complainant and others slept in the

house of jewan Khan and about 2:30 of night they heard
the noise and the complainant, Mahzar and Nausher woke
up and saw that the accused Tasawar Abbas, Ansaar
Abbas, Sher Muhammad, Zafar, Haidar Ali, Atta
Muhammad, Muhammad Khan had tied the hands of his
Bhateeja and Razia Bibi and at that time, accused were
armed with pistol and three un-known accused were also
armed with deadly weapon and in their view the accused
on the force of weapon started to taking his Bhateeja
and Razia Bibi. At this the complainant and witnesses
tried to save them but the accused extended threats
that whosoever came near to them done to death but the
complainant and witnesses while beaching from the
accused also proceeded with the accused and when they
reached at some distance from Abadi on a tubewell, the
accused became furious and they started torturing his
Bhateeja and his wife Razia Bibi and three un-
identified accused caught hold the complainant and
witnesses and in the meanwhile, Zafar accused raised
lalkara that Fazal Kareem and Razia Bibi be taught a
lesson for contracting marriage on their choice, the
accused Zafar and Sher caught hold his Bhateeja and
accused Tasawar fired two pistol shot at the face of
his Bhateeja. As the result of these fire shots his
Bhateeja fell down on the ground and in the meanwhile
Muhammad Khan accused had caught hold Razia Bibi and
accused Ansaar Abbas twicely fired at her face who
also fell down on the ground in an injured condition.
The accused while making firing and extended threats
to murder them fled away and when the complainant and
witnesses attended his Bhateeja and Razia Bibi at that
time both have already been died due to the injuries.
The motive behind the occurrence was that
Bhateeja of the complainant and Razia Bibi had
contracted the marriage of their choice and without
the consent of the parents of Razia Bibi and as Razia
Bibi was a sister of Tasawar Abbas and Ansaar Abbas
accused therefore, due to this grudge, the accused
have murdered them.
 3

3. That subsequently, during investigation,

complainant got recorded his supplementary statement
and also nominated Ghulam Sarwar and Walli Muhammad
who were previously shown as un-known accused. After
investigation, police kept the name of jewan Khan,
Wali Muhamamd and Haidar in column No.2, however,
Ansaar Abbas did not join the investigation,
therefore, police submitted challan against him under
section 512 Cr.PC, whereas the names of remaining
accused were kept in column No.3 and 4 of the report
under section 173 Cr.PC. The accused whose names were
mentioned in column No.2 summoned vide order dated
27.01.2014 to face the trial in this case. The
accused were formally charge sheeted who denied the
allegations leveled against them, therefore, the
prosecution evidence was summoned.

4. In order to prove its case, the prosecution

has produced as many as 14 witnesses and one is
appeared as Cw.

Pw.1 is Atta Muhammad who had identified the dead

body of Fazal Kareem at the time of P.m examination.

Pw.2 is Ahmed Ali complainant who reiterated the

same story as mentioned in the complaint Ex.PA,
however, he also named Ghulam Sarwar and Walli
Muhammad who were shown to be un-known accused at the
time of making complaint Ex.PA.

Pw.3 is Mazhar Abbas who is an eye witness of

the occurrence and stated the same story as narrated
by the complainant

Pw.4 is Tasawar Abbas 363-C who is a recovery

witness of pistol 9 m.m and magzeen recovered from
Tasawar Abbas and secured through recovery memo Ex.PF.

Pw.5 is Muhammad Ameen who escorted the dead

body of Razia Bibi to DHQ hospital, Jhang and he also
handed over the last worn clothes of Razia Bibi to the
I.o who secured the same through recovery memo Ex.PG
 4

Pw.6 is Karamat Hussain 326-C who was

posted at P.S Saddar and Muhammad Saleem Moharrar
handed over to him two sealed parcel for its onwards
transmission to the office of Chemical examiner,
Lahore which he deposited in the said office on
06.08.2013 and on 17.09.2013 again sealed parcel
containing four empties of 9 mm were handed over to
him and deposited the same in PFSA and on 24.09.2013
he again received the parcel of pistol 9 mm which was
also deposited by him in the office of PFSA.

Pw.7 is Khan Muhammad 785-C who has formally

chalked out FIR Ex.PH

Pw.8 is Muhammad Saleem 817-C who had received

and deposited the parcels of blood stained earth,
empties and parcel of pistol 9 mm for its onward
transmission to the office of PFSA.

PW.9 is Dr. Sayada Zakia Rafi who stated

that -------------

Pw.10 is Arbab Ahmed SI who is I.o of

this case and received the complaint Ex.pA from the
complainant, visited the place of occurrence,
inspected the dead bodies, prepared injury statement
and other documents and got sent the dead bodies of
Fazal Kareem and Razia Bibi for autopsy. This witness
arrested the accused and recovered pistol and empties
on the pointation of Tasawar accused. He prepared
recovery memos in this case, recorded the
supplementary statement of the complainant and
submitted the report under section 173 Cr.PC in the
court.

PW.11 is Nazir Ahmed who was handed

over the dead body of Fazal Kareem for its
transmission to DHQ Hospital, Jhang and after P.m
examination Doctor handed over to him P.M report and
three parcel which he handed over to the I.o who
recorded his statement under section 161 Cr.PC
 5

PW.12 is Ghulam Muhammad Patwari who had

prepared scale site plan Ex. PT and Ex.PT/1 and handed
over the same to the I.o who recorded his statement.
PW.13 is Kamran Ali SI who has also
partially conducted the investigation and he found
that the accused Wali Muhammad not involved in the
occurrence and he found that there is sufficient
evidence in respect of abetment of Muhammad Sarwar
accused for the commission of offence, he also
prepared report under section 173 Cr.PC duly forwarded
by the SHO.

Pw.14 is -------------------

After prosecution evidence, Muhammad

Aftab Anwar, Assistant Manager Sales and Distribution
Telenor was summoned as Cw on the application of
accused party who appeared as Cw.1 and stated that he
is unable to provide the requisite data/information in
respect of telenor mobile No.0345-7585677 in respect
of time, site, location etc of said mobile on
23.07.2013 because the said record is not available
with the company as the time limit has exceeded one
year.

5. Muhammad Imran Hussain learned ADPP had

given up Shoaib Akram 1201-C, Muhammad Zahid 1428-C
and Nausher Ali son of Hasham Ali,Gulzar Ahmed be un-
necessary and while tendering the reports of PFSA
Ex.PV to Ex.PY , closed the prosecution evidence.

6. The statements of accused under Section 342

Cr.P.C. were recorded. However, the accused neither
produced any defence evidence nor opted to appear his
own witness under section 340 (2) Cr.PC. In reply to a
question as to why the case was registered against him
and why the PWs have deposed against you, Tasawar
Abbas accused replied as under:

“ ”

That in reply to the same question, the remaining accused

----- have stated that the statement of Tasawar Abbas was
 6

recorded in their presence and hearing and they endorsed

the reply of Tasawar Abbas given to the above said answer.

07. Mukhdoom Majeed Hussain, learned defence

counsel argued that infact it is a un-seen and un-
witnessed occurrence committed by the un-known accused
at the night time and in this regard learned counsel
has referred the complaint Ex.PA by contending that in
Ex.PA the complainant has named 08 accused whereas he
has shown three un-known accused to be armed with
deadly weapons but after 1 ½ months of the occurrence
he nominated Ghulam Sarwar and Walli Muhammad as un-
known accused despite this fact that Ghulam Sarwar and
Walli Muhammad are relative of the complainant and the
complainant and witnesses were fully aware their names
and feature and the complainant and witnesses had
witnessed the occurrence, they would have nominated
Ghulam Sarwar and Walli Muhammad at the time of
submission of complaint. This shows that neither the
complainant nor the witnesses were present at the
place of occurrence. Learned counsel further submitted
that allegedly the occurrence was happened in the
intervening night of 22/23.07.2013 at about 2: 30 p.m
night but Ferd Feeyan / complaint Ex.PA was handed
over to the i.o at Adda 12 Miles and FIR was chalked
out at 7:40 a.m on 23.07.2013. in this way, there is a
delay of about five hours in lodging the FIR and the
distance between the place of occurrence and police
station is about 11 miles which can very easily be
traveled within half an hour and this shows that
occurrence was committed by un-known accused and
complainant and witnesses were summoned from their
houses and after due consultations and deliberations
the FIR was chalked out. The complainant and witnesses
are the resident of Chak No.212 Sargana which is at a
distance of about 60/70 kilo meter and only a story
has been concocted about their arrival at the house of
jewan Khan at Mouza Bullo Shahabal for spending night
and effecting compromise, so that the evidence in this
case be crafted. The story as narrated by the
 7

complainant and eye witnesses is un-natural as no body

will murder any person in the presence of witnesses
and no reason has been extended that why the accused
spared the complainant and witnesses, despite the
enmity with them. Moreover, allegedly the deceased
were taken from the Abadi and at that time, there was
hue and cry but no witness of Abadi has been cited and
even none of the witnesses have informed the police
about tying the hands of Razia Bibi and Fazal kareem
by the accused through telephone. The marriage between
Fazal Kareem and Razia Bibi is not established as no
nikkah nama, witnesses, registrar, Molvi, date and
time has been mentioned or any of the document was
secured by the police during investigation. The dead
body of Razia Bibi was buried by the accused party at
Bullo Shahabal and if Razia Bibi had eloped with Fazal
Kareem and the present accused had murdered her then
in that eventuality the accused party after murder
them would have naturally fled away and in that
eventuality the complainant party should have buried
the dead body of Razia Bibi. The medical evidence is
contradictory to the ocular account and there was no
source of light at the place of occurrence and
recovery was planted by the I.o while in connivance
with the complainant and the police had malafidely
sent the samples of different articles on different
dates and the matching of empties with the pistol
recovered from Taswar Abbas accused has no value in
the eyes of law as he was un-lawfully confined and the
police fired pistol prepared empties and sent the
parcel of empties on 18.09.2013 whereas the parcel of
blood stained earth, clothes and others were sent to
the office of Chemical examiner on 05.08.2013 and
06.08.2013 and immediately after preparing the
empties, Tasawar Abbas shown to be arrested and
recovery of pistol 9 mm was planted upon him from
which the empties were prepared. Moreover, during the
investigation I.o while appearing Pw.10 has stated
that in his investigation, the complainant and
witnesses were not present at the place of occurrence
 8

and he also found the accused Wali Muhammad and Jewan

Khan, Haidar Ali to be not involved in the occurrence
and in this way, he contradicted the stances of the
complainant and witnesses and in the above said back
ground, the prosecution failed to prove its case
against the accused , therefore, he prayed that the
accused be acquitted.

8 On the other hand, learned ADPP duly

assisted by the learned counsel for the complainant
argued that though the FIR in this case was not
promptly lodged but a plausible explanation is
available on record as the complainant and witnesses
were resident of Chak no.212 JB Sargana which is
located at 60/70 kilo meters from the place of
occurrence, therefore, they cannot leave the dead body
of un-attended and in that eventuality, the accused
party had an opportunity to dis-appear the corpuses of
Fazal kareem and Razia Bibi. Learned counsel further
submitted that the parties are closely related to each
other, therefore, no chance of mis-identity and false
identity of the accused and there was no reason that
the complainant and witness will let go the original
culprits and nominate the present accused because
there was no previous enmity between the parties.
Motive in this case is fully proved as Razia Bibi had
eloped with Fazal kareem and in cases of love
marriage, nikkah nama and place of nikkah nama is
always in the knowledge of bride and bride groom and
that is the reason of non submission of nikkah nama or
producing the Molvi or registrar during the
investigation. Learned counsel further argued that in
murder cases only close relatives are shown to be
witness and no alien and stranger is cited as witness
because in our society no body is ready to give
evidence of any murder case except the relatives. That
after the occurrence, Ansaar Abbas became P.O,
therefore, presumption goes against the accused party
that they were involved in the occurrence and due to
this reason the real brother of Tasawar Abbas became
P.o. I.o was not a honest person and his statement has
 9

no value in this case. The prosecution witnesses are

consistent on all the major point, time, mode, manner
of recovery, therefore, the prosecution has fully
proved its case against the accused and at the end,
learned counsel prayed for the conviction of the
accused as they have committed the murder of two
innocent persons.

9. Arguments heard and record perused.

10. That in this case allegedly the occurrence

had happened on 2;30 p.m night on the intervening
night of 22/23.7.2013 but the FIR was chalked out at
7:40 a.m on 23.07.2013 with a delay of about five
hours and no plausible explanation has been given by
the complainant and witness of this inordinate delay
as the police station Saddar is located at a distance
of 11 miles from the place of occurrence which in this
modern era can be traveled within a period of half an
hour and now the mobile phones are available with
every body and in this case the complainant and three
other persons have been shown to be an eye witnesses
of the occurrence and they most have mobile cells in
their possession as no evidence has been lead to
establish that the accused have snatched their mobile
phones and in this back ground there is much weight
age in the arguments of learned defence counsel that
infact it was a un-seen and un-witnessed occurrence
and the complainant and witnesses were called from
their houses which is located at a distance of 60/70
kilo meter and thereafter proper consultations and
deliberations the present accused were nominated.

That so far the ocular account in this

case is concerned it was furnished by Pw.2 Ahmed Ali
and Pw.3 Mazhar Abbas but their statements shows that
they are only the chance witnesses as they have
neither any business place nor any residence at Mouza
Shahabal. Ahmed Ali complainant and Mazhar Abbas Pw
have given a reason of their presence at Bullo
Shahabal that Fazal Kareem contracted marriage with
his choice with Razia Bibi and on this marriage the
 10

parents of Razia Bibi were not happy, therefore, they

visited the house of Jewan khan for compromise
purposes but astonishingly without effecting
compromise they took the couple with them and this
reflects that infact the story was crafted in respect
of visiting Bulloshahbal by the complainant and Pws
with Fazal Kareem and Razia Bibi deceased as no
prudent man will dare to visit the house of the

parents of a female whose daughter has been run away

with some body and especially in the company of the
couple who has contracted marriage.

The episode of the occurrence started at

2:30 a.m night and after hearing the noise,
complainant Ahmed Ali Pw.2 and witnesses Mazhar Abbas
and Nausher woke up and saw that the accused facing
the trial had already been tied the hands of Fazal
kareem and Razia Bibi deceased and the complainant and
witnesses tried to rescue Fazal kareem and Razia Bibi
and beseech the accused and thereafter the said
 11

accused alongwith Fazal karem and Razia Bibi reached

near a tubewell and the complainant and witnesses also
followed them and reached there and in their view the
accused started to torturing Fazal Kareem and Razia
Bibi and three accused caught hold the witnesses and
kept them standing. The accused Zafar raised a lalkara
that Fazal kareem and Razia Bibi be taught a lesson
for contracting marriage on their choice. Accused Sher
and Zafar caught hold Fazal Kareem and Tasawar Abbas
twicely fired with his pistol which landed on the face
of Fazal Kareem and Muhammad Khan had caught hold
Razia Bibi and accused Ansar Abbas also made two fire
shots at Razia Bibi which landed on her face and as a
result of these injuries, Fazal kareem and Razia Bibi
died. The prosecution story as narrated by Pw.2 Ahmed
Ali complainant and Pw.3 Mazhar Abbas does not appeal
to the reasoning as in natural course of events if the
accused were determined to murder Razia Bibi and Fazal
kareem then they would not have allowed to follow
them from village Bulloshahbal to Tube well. All the
accused who were armed with deadly weapons had an
other choice to restrain the complainant and witnesses
to follow them as they were allegedly 11 in number,
therefore, they were in position to overpower the
complainant and witnesses and tied them in the house
of jewan Khan.

The FIR in this case was recorded after due

deliberations and consultations

(Ch.Zia Ullah)
Announced: Addl. Sessions Judge,
10.03.2016 Jhang.

Certified that this judgment comprising

twenty (16) pages, has been dictated, read, corrected
and signed by me.

Dated: Addl. Sessions Judge,

10.03.2016. Jhang.
12
 13

IN THE COURT OF BEDAR BAKHT,

ADDL. SESSIONS JUDGE, JHANG.

CNSA Case No.16 of 2011.

CNSA Trial No.__of 2012.

The State. Vs. Adeed Ullah S/O Shafeeullah

Khan, Caste Pathan, aged 20 years,
R/O Ghazni Khail Lucky Murawat.

CASE FIR NO.157. DATED 12.05.2011.

OFFENCE U/S 9-C OF THE CONTROL OF
NARCOTIC SUBSTANCES ACT, 1997.
POLICE STATION 18-HAZARI, JHANG.

Date of Decision:22.02.2012.

JUDGMENT.

Brief facts as mentioned by the complainant

Pw.5 Sajajd Hussain ASI through his complaint EX.P.A.
are that on 12.05.2011, he alongwith Muhammad Raffique
531/C, Muhammad Yousaf 575/C, Munawar Abbas 2007/C,
Muhammad Tufail 1431/C, driver Nobahar Shah was
present at the western bank of head Trimmu on his
official vehicle No.9530/JGC. He received a secret
information that on eastern bank of Trimmu head, one
person is present with Charas. If raid is conducted,
he can be apprehended. Upon the said information, the
 14

complainant Sajajd Hussain ASI conducted raid at the

eastern side of Trimmu Head where accused Adeedullah
was standing, who tried to flee away, but he was
apprehended by the police. Accused Adeedullah was
having a shopper of blue colour in his hand. On its
checking, Charas/GARDA was recovered, which became
1520 grams on its weight. From his right side pocket
of Qameez, cash of Rs.350/- was recovered. Ten grams
charas was separated for chemical analysis. Charas was
made into sealed parcel and secured vide memo EX.P.B.
Cash was also taken into possession vide recovery memo
EX.P.C. On the complaint EX.P.A. of Sajjad Hussain
ASI, formal FIR EX.P.A/1 was registered by Masood Aziz
1314/MHC Duty Officer. The case was investigated by
Habib Ullah Inspector, who came at the spot, recorded
statements of the prosecution witnesses, prepared
rough site plan EX.P.D. and arrested the accused. On
completion of investigation, challan was submitted in
the court for trial.

2. The case was entrusted to this Court for

trial. This court delivered necessary copies of the
documents/annexures as well as statements of the Pws
to the accused as required by Section 265-C. Cr.P.C.
and charge sheeted the accused on 24.09.2011 who
pleaded not guilty and claimed trial, hence, the
prosecution evidence was summoned.

3. In order to prove its case, the prosecution

produced Masood Aziz 1314/MHC as Pw.1, who on receipt
of complaint EX.P.A. sent by Sajjad Hussain ASI,
registered FIR EX.P.A/1, which is in his handwriting.
In cross examination, he denied that the complaint
EX.P.A. was not dispatched by Sajjad Hussain through
Muhammad Faiz 1431/C.

4. Shameer Ali 733/C appeared as Pw.2 and

deposed that on 24.05.2011, Muhammad Khan MHC handed
over to him a sealed parcel said to contain Charas for
depositing the same to the office of Chemical
Examiner, Lahore. On 25.05.2011, he deposited the said
sealed parcel of sample in the office of Chemical
 15

Examiner, Lahore. As far as the said sealed parcel

remained in his custody, no body tampered with it. His
statement was recorded by the I.O. on 28.05.2011. In
cross examination, he stated that he deposited the
sealed parcel in the office of Chemical Examiner,
Lahore on 25.05.2011. Learned defence counsel
confronted him with his statement under Section 161
Cr.P.C. EX.D.B. wherein certain words were missing.

5. Muhammad Khan 1171/MHC appeared as Pw.3, who

deposed that on 12.05.2011, he was posted as Moharar
at Police Station 18-Hazari, Jhang. On the same day,
Habib Ullah Inspector/I.O. delivered to him two sealed
parcels, said to contain case property and sample. He
kept both these samples in MAALKHANA in proper
custody. On 24.05.2011, he handed over sealed parcel
of sample said to contain Charas to Shameer Ali
constable for its transmission to the office of
Chemical Examiner, Lahore. As far as parcels remained
in his custody, no body tampered with it. His
statement was recorded by the I.O. In cross
examination, he stated that Habib Ullah Inspector
recorded statements of the Pws under Section 161
Cr.P.C. He got recorded in his statement under Section
161 Cr.P.C. that two sealed parcels were handed over
to him consisted of case property as well as sample.
He was confronted with EX.D.A. wherein handing over of
two parcels consisting of case property was not
mentioned. Only parcel of sample was mentioned. He
denied that he made improvements malafidely in order
to strengthen the prosecution case.

6. Muhammad Raffique 531/C appeared as Pw.4 and

stated that on 12.05.2011, he was present alongwith
Muhammad Yousaf, Munawar Abbas and Sajjad Hussain ASI
at Trimmu head. On receipt of secret information,
Sajajd Hussain raided at the eastern bank of the river
where accused Adeedullah was present, who tried to
flee away, but was arrested. He was holding a shopping
bag of blue colour. On its checking, Charas GARDA
weighing 1520 grams was recovered. Ten grams charas
 16

was separated as sample and secured through recovery

memo EX.P.B. On personal search of accused, cash of
Rs.350/- P.2 was also recovered from his right side of
pocket of Qameez, which was also taken into possession
vide memo EX.P.C. He and Muhammad Yousaf affixed their
signatures as marginal witnesses. His statement was
recorded by the police. In cross examination, he
admitted that police guard remains available on both
side of the Trimmu head, but it performs duty of flow
of traffic only, however, the said guard is of Punjab
Police and not of traffic police. Ten grams charas
separated from the recovered charas was in the shape
of pieces and the said charas was weighed. He could
not tell the number of pieces separated for analysis
weighing 10 grams. Sajjad Hussain ASI did not take
sample from each recovered piece. Pw volunteered
because it was in bulk. GARDA was in pieces of charas
and not in uniform shape like CHITAR. Pieces were
separated individually. Sajjad ASI searched shopping
bag held by the accused wherefrom charas was
recovered. The witness could not remember the words of
seal whereby recovered charas was sealed.

7. Sajjad Hussain ASI appeared as Pw.5, who

deposed that on 12.05.2011, he was posted at Police
Station 18-Hazari. On the same day, at about 04:45 or
05:00 p.m. he was present at western side of Trimmu
Head alongwith Muhammad Raffique, Muhammad Yousaf,
Munawar Abbas constables Head on official vehicle. On
secret information, he conducted raid at the eastern
side of Trimmu Head where accused Adeedullah, present
in court, was standing. He was holding a blue colour
shopping bag. On its checking, charas weighing 1520
grams was recovered. From his right side pocket of
Qameez, cash of Rs.350/- P.2 was recovered. Ten grams
charas was separated for chemical analysis. Charas was
made into sealed parcel and secured vide memo EX.P.B.
Cash was also taken into possession vide recovery memo
EX.P.C. He prepared complaint EX.P.A. against the
accused and sent the same for registration of case
through Muhammad Tufail 1431/C. They were present at
 17

the same place where Habib Ullah Inspector came. He

handed over the accused as well as file of this case
to Habibullah Inspector for further investigation. In
cross examination, he stated that he has not mentioned
the time of occurrence in EX.P.A. separately. GARDA
CHARAS is in the shape of small pieces. He did not
take sample from each of the piece recovered from the
accused. He denied that P.1 is not Charas or the words
S.H. upon the parcel are tampered with. When Habib
Ullah Inspector came at the spot and asked about case
property, he informed him that the case property ha
been sent to the Police Station.

8. Habib Ullah Inspector appeared as Pw.6, who

deposed that on 12.05.2011 at about 06:40 p.m. he
reached at eastern bank of Trimmu Head on receipt of
information where Sajjad Hussain ASI alongwith
witnesses were present. He recorded statements of the
witnesses and Sajjad Hussain ASI and prepared site
plan EX.P.D. The case property had already been sent
to Police Station. On 28.05.2011, he recorded
statements of the Moharar and Bashir constable
regarding parcel. Accused was associated with
investigation. On 15.05.2011, he got prepared challan.
In cross examination, he stated that he is not witness
of the occurrence. The case property P.1, cash P.2 and
sample of charas were not shown to him at the spot. He
did not record statement of Muhammad Tufail.
Statements of Moharar and Shameer were recorded
correctly and read over to them. He further stated
that handwriting on EX.P.B., EX.P.C. & EX.P.D. are not
similar. He denied that he arrested the accused one
day prior to the alleged occurrence from the
jurisdiction of Police Station Sadar Jhang. He further
denied that he and the accused had exchanged hot words
over bill of hotel. He denied that nothing was
recovered from the accused.

9. The learned ADPP gave up Pws Muhammad Yousaf

being unnecessary and after tendering report of
Chemical Examiner EX.P.E. closed his evidence.
 18

10. On conclusion of the prosecution evidence,

statement of accused under Section 342 Cr.P.C. was
recorded, in which he denied that Charas as alleged by
prosecution was recovered from his possession.
Regarding report of Chemical Examiner, Lahore EX.P.E.
he replied that it is a fabricated piece of evidence.
In reply to the question as to why the case was
registered against him and why Pws deposed against
him, he stated that:
“One day prior to the occurrence within the
limits of Police Station Sadar Jhang, I was
apprehended by the Investigating Officer because
I was working at a hotel as waiter. Due to
demand of bill, a false case has been registered
against me. All the witnesses are of Police
Officials and they have lodged this case against
me to show their efficiency.”

11. Accused neither opted to appear as his own

witness as per terms of Section 340(2) Cr.P.C. nor
opted to produce any evidence in his defence.

12. Arguments heard.

13. The learned DDPP opening the arguments

contended that the prosecution has proved its case
against the accused. The evidence of the police
officials is as good as of a witness from the public.
All the witnesses are consistant. Learned counsel for
the accused has failed to shatter their veracity. The
menace of narcotics is spreading in the society day by
day, hence, it requires to be dealt with iron hands.
The recovered stuff has been proved to be Charas
through report of Chemical Examiner EX.P.E. and the
prosecution has substantiated its case beyond any
shadow of doubt, therefore, accused may be awarded
maximum punishment.

14. On the other hand, learned defence counsel

argued that the prosecution has miserably failed to
prove its case against the accused beyond any shadow
of doubt. Benefit of even slightest doubt goes to the
 19

accused. There are glaring and material discrepancies

among statements of the prosecution witnesses showing
that either the occurrence did not take place as
alleged in the FIR or witnesses were not present at
the time of the alleged occurrence. These material
discrepancies are sufficient to observe that nothing
was recovered from the accused. Learned counsel for
the accused further argued that the Investigating
Officer Habib Ullah Inspector was not handed over case
property, i.e. recovered Charas by the complainant
Sajjad Hussain ASI. There is no evidence that case
property was sent to Police Station and remained in
the custody of the Moharar. The accused is first
offender of tender age. He is a poor man and waiter at
a hotel. Harsh words were exchange with Habib Ullah
Inspector by the accused over amount of bill of hotel,
where he was serving as waiter. Having grudge over it,
Habib Ullah Inspector planted Charas upon him. The
prosecution has not separated sample of Charas from
each of piece of Charas, therefore, at the most, the
Charas which was sent for chemical analysis, could be
presumed to be recovered from the possession of the
accused. At the end, it was requested that the accused
is innocent. So, accused deserves to be acquitted
granting him benefit of doubt.

15. Record perused.

16. In the light of argument of learned counsel

for the accused that sample was not separated from
each piece of the recovered Charas, today the case
property was requisitioned and perceived by holding
it. The recovered Charas was in the shape of
innumerable pieces. Each piece was more or less of
size of a gram/maize seed. It was not possible to
separate sample from each of the recovered piece of
Charas. So, the arguments of learned counsel for the
accused that sample was not separated from each of the
recovered piece of Charas is without any substance.

17. In the instant case, Sajjad Hussain ASI Pw.5

in presence of Muhammad Raffique Pw.4 nabbed
 20

Adeedullah accused at the eastern bank of Trimmu Head,

who was holding a shopper. On its checking, 1520 grams
Charas/GARDA was recovered. It has been explained by
the witnesses that the recovered Charas was in the
shape of pieces. Ten grams was separated for chemical
analysis and according to the report of Chemical
Examiner, Lahore EX.P.E., it is proved that sample was
of Charas. In addition tio the recovery witnesses,
Pw.2 Shamshair Ali 733/C took the sealed parcel of
sample to the office of Chemical Examiner, Lahore
intact whereas Pw.3 Muhammad Khan kept the recovered
Charas and sample in safe custody and handed over the
same to Shameer Ali on 24.05.2011 for depositing the
same in the office of Chemical Examiner, Lahore. The
learned counsel for the accused has suggested
Habibullah Inspector Pw.6 that due to exchange of
harsh words over the amount of bill of hotel, he
planted the alleged Charas upon accused, but
unfortunately, no evidence has been adduced in support
of contention of the accused. The accused is resident
of Lucky Marwat, Khyber Pakhtoonkhaw. He could not
justify his presence at head Trimmue, which is at a
considerable distance from his residence. The
recovered Charas was 1520 grams, i.e. more than 1-1/2
K.G. which cannot be planted by a police officer
merely to show his efficiency. Even otherwise, the
accused has absolutely failed to place on record any
material disclosing that the complainant Sajjad
Hussain Pw.5 had any animosity, ill-will or grudge
against him. Needless to say that police officials are
as good witnesses as of public witnesses. Their
evidence cannot be brushed aside merely on the ground
that they are police officials. Normally, persons from
public avoid to become a witness in a narcotics case
either due to fear of enmity with the narcotics
peddlers or due to repeated visits in the courts for
their evidence.

18. Pw.5 Sajjad Hussain ASI has categorically

stated in cross examination that he had dispatched the
case property, i.e. Charas to Police Station when
 21

Habibullah Inspector/Investigating Officer came at he

spot. The said fact has been proved by Pw.6 Habib
Ullah Inspector, who deposed in examination in chief
that case property and recovered amount had already
been sent to Police Station.

19. All the witnesses were cross examined by the

learned defence counsel, but he was unable to
elucidate any material favoring the accused or even
creating any doubt regarding recovery of Charas
weighing 1520 grams from accused Adeedullah.

20. In the light of above discussion, I have

come to the conclusion that prosecution has proved its
case against accused Adeedullah for recovery of Charas
weighing 1520 grams beyond any shadow of doubt.
Resultantly, I hold him guilty of offence under
Section 9-C CNSA.

21. As far as quantum of punishment is

concerned, the convict is of about 20 years of age. He
is first offender, therefore, considering these
aspects, he is convicted under Section 9-C C.N.S.A and
sentenced to five years R.I. with fine of Rs.10,000/-,
in default of payment of fine, he will further undergo
six months S.I.

22. The accused/convict is also given benefit of

Section 382-B. Cr.P.C.

23. The case property, i-e, Charas be

confiscated to the State and shall be destroyed after
the expiry of period of appeal/revision, if any.

24. The convict is present in court in custody.

He be sent back to District Jail Jhang to serve the
sentence awarded to him.

25. Copy of this judgment is provided to the

convict free of cost against his thumb impression upon
the interim order.
 22

26. A copy of this judgment be sent to the

District Public Prosecutor, as per terms of Section
373 Cr.P.C.

27. File be consigned to the record room after

its due completion.

Announced: Addl. Sessions Judge,

22.02.2012. Jhang.

Certified that this judgment comprising ten

pages, has been dictated, read, corrected and signed
by me.

Dated: Addl. Sessions Judge,

22.02.2012. Jhang.
*S.S*