IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PAKISTAN 
(Appellate Jurisdiction) 
 
 
PRESENT:  
Mr. Justice Manzoor Ahmad Malik 
Mr. Justice Syed Mansoor Ali Shah 
Mr. Justice Qazi Muhammad Amin Ahmed 
 
Criminal Appeals No.13-P of 2009, 37-P & 38-P of 2011 & 16-P 
of 2012 
(Against the judgments dated 15.6.2007, 30.5.2011 and 19.10.2011 of the 
Peshawar High Court, Peshawar passed in Cr. A. No.666/2004, 602 & 614/2009 
and 351/2009). 
 
State through Director ANF Peshawar 
(in all cases) 
…Appellant(s) 
VERSUS 
Muhammad Ramzan 
Rahim Gul 
Nasrullah 
Lal Pervez 
(in Crl.A.13-P/2009) 
(in Crl.A.37-P/2011) 
(in Crl.A.38-P/2011) 
(in Crl.A.16-P/2012) 
…Respondent(s) 
 
 
For the Appellant(s) 
: Mr. Muhammad Tariq Khan, ASC 
 
 
 
For the Respondent(s) 
: N.R. 
 
 
 
Date of Hearing 
: 29.04.2019 
 
Judgment 
 
 
 
Qazi Muhammad Amin Ahmed, J.- With a common 
thread, the captioned appeals, though arisen out of different cases, 
nonetheless, inhere identical question of law and thus are being 
decided through this single judgment. Respondents were indicted 
for possession of narcotic contraband, in excess of 10 kilograms in 
each case; convicted under Section 9(c) of the Control of Narcotics 
Substances Act, 1997, they were sentenced to imprisonment for 
life along with fine. In appeals, their convictions were maintained, 
however, sentences awarded to them by the learned trial Courts 
were reduced to ten years R.I. The State did not countenance with 
the error and sought rectification thereof. In each case the leave 
has been granted to examine the vires of reduction of sentence. 
Respondents, released in consequence of the impugned judgments, 
despite repeated attempts, nonetheless, found it convenient to stay 
away from the Court by avoiding the process; they cannot be 
allowed to hold the process of law in abeyance by their default, 
Crl.As No.13-P/09, 37-P & 38-P/11 & 16-P/12 
 
2
seemingly deliberate in circumstances. An appellant or a 
respondent has to be afforded a reasonable opportunity of hearing 
so as to vindicate his position more so in situations involving 
corporal consequences, however a party cannot avail this 
opportunity to a point of time of its own choice and therefore once 
the absence is found calculated to obstruct the judicial process, a 
case can be decided on its own merits. This practice is being 
consistently followed since the advent of case reported as Chan 
Shah versus The Crown (PLD 1956 FC 43) subsequently reaffirmed 
in the cases reported as Gul Hassan and another versus The State 
(PLD 1969 SC 89) as well as Ikramullah and others versus The 
State (2015 SCMR 1002). In this backdrop, we have examined the 
propriety of reduction of sentences with the assistance of learned 
counsel for the appellant. He has invited our attention to the 
proviso to Section 9 of the Act ibid, mandatorily providing 
punishment being not less than imprisonment for life in case the 
quantity of contraband exceeds ten kilograms, a common feature 
in each case.  
2. 
 
Command of law escaped notice of the learned Judges 
of the Peshawar High Court and thus there being no occasion for 
the reduction of sentences, the captioned appeals are allowed, 
impugned judgments are set aside. Sentences awarded to the 
respondents by the learned trial Courts are restored. Perpetual 
warrants of arrest shall issue to bring the respondents to law so as 
to serve out sentences consequent upon convictions, never 
challenged by them before this Court. 
   
 
 
 
 
JUDGE 
 
 
 
JUDGE 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Islamabad, the 
29th of April, 2019 
Ghulam Raza/* 
JUDGE 
 
