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 Appeal No.16-P/2013 
(against the judgment dated 17.6.2004 
passed 
by 
Peshawar 
High 
Court, 
Abbottabad Bench passed in Criminal 
Appeal No.198/2003). 
 
State thr. ANF Peshawar 
…Appellant(s) 
VERSUS 
Olufemi 
…Respondent(s) 
 
 
For the Appellant(s) 
: Mr.Muhammad Tariq Khan, ASC 
 
 
 
For the Respondent(s) 
: N.R. 
 
 
 
Date of Hearing 
: 29.04.2019 
 
Judgment 
Olufemi, a Nigerian national, respondent herein was 
surprised by contingent of Anti Narcotics Force, Haripur; he was 
found with 25 kilograms of heroine and sent to face trial before a 
learned 
Judge, 
Special 
Court 
(CNS), 
Peshawar, 
camp 
at 
Abbottabad; returned a guilty verdict; he was convicted under 
Section 9(c) of the Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997 and 
sentenced to imprisonment for life along side to the tune of rupees 
one million or five year S.I. in default thereof with benefit under 
Section 382-B of the Code of Criminal Procedure the learned 
Peshawar High Court vide impugned judgment dated 17.6.2004, 
however proceeded to acquit him from the charge primarily on the 
ground that, contraband allegedly recovered was destroyed in 
violation of procedure provided under Section 516 A of the Code 
ibid, vires whereof are being disputed with considerable vehemence 
on the ground that destruction of the contraband under 
magisterial supervision ruled out possibility of any foul play and 
thus strict non-compliance with the suggested procedure would 
not vitiate respondent’s culpability, otherwise firmly established 
Criminal Appeal No.16-P/2013 
2
through massive evidence, it is concluded by the learned standing 
counsel.  
 
We would abstain to examine the vires of arguments 
raised before us in absence of the respondent, a Nigerian national, 
reported to have left Pakistan as in his absence the exercise would 
be merely an academic discussion without consequential impact; 
for yet another reason we find it inexpedient to interfere with the 
impugned judgment as in the event of reversal of the impugned 
view, a cumbersome procedure of respondent’s extradition would 
be a process far from convenient. Much water has flown under the 
bridge; the contraband has since been destroyed with respondent 
no longer within the Realm. Appeal is dismissed. 
     
 
 
 
 
JUDGE 
 
 
 
JUDGE 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Islamabad, the 
29th of April, 2019 
Ghulam Raza/* 
JUDGE 
 
