IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PAKISTAN 
(Appellate Jurisdiction) 
 
 
PRESENT: 
Mr. Justice Sajjad Ali Shah 
Mr. Justice Qazi Muhammad Amin Ahmed 
 
 
Criminal Petition No.147-K of 2020 
(Against the judgment dated .27.08.2020 passed by the High Court of 
Sindh, Circuit Bench at Hyderabad in Cr. A. No.46 of 2020) 
 
 
Aijaz Ali Rajpar  
 
 
…Petitioner(s) 
 
 
 
 
 
Versus 
 
 
The State 
 
…Respondent(s) 
 
For the Petitioner(s): 
Mian Taj Muhammad, ASC 
 
For the State: 
Mr. Hussain Khan Baloch,  
 
Addl. Prosecutor General Sindh 
 
Date of hearing: 
09.09.2021. 
 
ORDER 
 
 
 
 Qazi Muhammad Amin Ahmed, J.- Surprised by a 
contingent of Mitiari police with 1920 grams cannabis, the petitioner 
was sent to face trial before a learned Addl. Sessions Judge/Special 
Judge (CNS) at Hyderabad; he claimed trial that resulted into his 
conviction under section 9(c) of the Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 
1997 vide judgment dated 12.11.2019; he was sentenced to 4-years  
6-months with a  direction for payment of fine. The High Court of Sindh 
first remanded the case for petitioner’s re-examination under section 
342 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898, however, the trial Court 
again proceeded to convict him with the same quantum of sentence vide 
judgment dated 10.08.2020, upheld vide impugned judgment dated 
27.08.2020, vires whereof, are being assailed on a number of grounds; 
the bottom line is that a fake recovery was foisted upon the petitioner to 
settle a previous score with him as his brother had moved an 
application under section 491 of the Code ibid against the local police, 
shortly before his unjustified arrest. Without opting to be his own 
witness to disprove the charge, the petitioner tendered order dated 
17.11.2018 purportedly issued by an Addl. Sessions Judge on a motion 
made by his brother Muhammad Iqbal; the petition was dismissed vide 
Criminal Petition No. 2-Q of 2021 
2
order of even date as a Bailiff/Raid Commissioner deputed by the Court 
reported the accusation as factually incorrect. The learned counsel 
alternately argued for reduction of sentence to the period already 
undergone as, according to him, after inclusion of remissions, the 
petitioner has served out a substantial portion of his sentence. The 
learned Law Officer has, however, defended the impugned judgment 
and also opposed reduction in sentence on the ground of its being 
within the remit of law. 
2. 
 
Heard. Record perused. 
3. 
 
A considerable quantity of the contraband rules out false 
imposition; reliance upon some documents suggesting an antedated 
botched attempt in the Court of Session, without entry in the witness-
box, does not by itself support the hypothesis of suggested animosity 
with the police nor does it undermine the preponderance of prosecution 
evidence, constituting a continuous chain of events that inspiringly 
framed the petitioner with the charge. Both the recovery witnesses, 
namely, Qadir Bukhsh (PW-1) and Ali Ahmed, ASI (PW-2) have not even 
been suggested any past rancor harbored by the raiding party. The trial 
Judge, after twice appraising the evidence found the witnesses in a 
unison, a view confirmed by the High Court. Upon our own 
examination, we have found the witnesses straightforward and 
consistent, bracing the cross-examination without any embarrassment. 
Safe custody and transmission of samples accompanied by a positive 
forensic report clinched the indictment. We have also considered the 
alternate plea of reduction in the sentence; on account of actual period 
spent in the prison, do not feel persuaded to grant the request. Scales 
being in balance with a wage conscionable in circumstances, petition 
fails; leave declined.  
 
 
Judge 
 
 
 
Judge 
Karachi, the 
9th September, 2021 
Azmat/- 
