IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PAKISTAN 
(APPELLATE JURISDICTION) 
 
 
PRESENT: 
MR. JUSTICE YAHYA AFRIDI 
MR. JUSTICE SAYYED MAZAHAR ALI AKBAR NAQVI 
MR. JUSTICE MUHAMMAD ALI MAZHAR 
 
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 208 OF 2022 
(On appeal against the judgment dated 28.01.2020 
passed by the High Court of Sindh, Bench at 
Sukkur in Criminal Jail Appeal No. D-172/2019) 
 
Zain Ali 
… Appellant 
VERSUS 
The State 
… Respondent 
 
For the Appellant: 
Mr. Muhammad Shabbir Rajput, ASC 
 
For the State: 
Raja Inam, Special Prosecutor, ANF 
 
Mr. Ehtisham ul Haq, Special Prosecutor, ANF 
 
Date of Hearing: 
 
29.05.2023 
 
JUDGMENT 
 
SAYYED MAZAHAR ALI AKBAR NAQVI, J.- Appellant was tried by the 
learned Additional Sessions Judge-III, Sukkur in terms of the case 
registered vide FIR No. 08 dated 25.03.2013 under Section 9(c) of the 
Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997, at Police Station ANF, Sukkur, as 
contraband charas weighing 563 kilograms and opium weighing 1500 
grams was recovered from the secret cavities of the vehicle, which the 
appellant was driving. The learned Trial Court vide its judgment dated 
30.07.2019 convicted the appellant under Section 9(c) of the Control of 
Narcotic Substances Act, 1997, and sentenced him to imprisonment for 
life. He was also directed to pay a fine of Rs.100,000/- or in default 
whereof to further undergo SI for one year. Benefit of Section 382-B 
Cr.P.C. was also extended to him. In appeal the learned High Court 
maintained the conviction and sentences recorded against the appellant 
by the learned Trial Court.  
Criminal Appeal No. 208/2022 
2
2. 
 
The prosecution story as given in the impugned judgment 
reads as under:- 
“2. 
Succinctly, the prosecution case as depicted in the FIR is that on 
25-03-2013 at about 7-30 am, at Old Toll Plaza situated at National 
Highway, Rohri, a team of ANF police headed by Inspector Tahir Ahmed 
secured 563 kilograms charas in shape of 563 foil packed packets, each 
containing two slabs and 1500 grams Opium in shape of three packets 
from the secret cavities of Vigo Hilux Toyota vehicle bearing No.CS-8258. 
During the personal search of the accused, a cash amount of Rs. 5300/-, 
one Watan card, some other cards, two mobile phones, 8 mobile sims, 
one wrist watch, one wallet of black colour were recovered from the 
possession of accused in presence of mashirs namely HC Ayaz Ahmed and 
PC Shoukat Ali. From further search of the vehicle, its registration book in 
the name Gazali Textile Mill. One Photostat copy of CNIC in the name 
Shahbaz Ghazi was also recovered in presence of mashirs namely HC Ayaz 
Ahmed and PC Shoukat Ali. Accused further disclosed that the alleged 
contraband material belongs to one Zubair Ahmed, who is resident of 
District Sanghar. Such mashirnama of arrest and recovery was prepared 
at the spot in the presence of mashirs. Thereafter the accused alongwith 
recovered case property and vehicle were brought to Police Station ANF 
Sukkur, where the instant case for an offence punishable u/s 9(c) of 
Control of Narcotic Substance Act, 1997, was registered against him on 
behalf of the State. On completion of the usual formalities, the ANF 
police submitted report u/s173 Cr.PC before the competent Court of 
law.” 
 
3. 
 
After completion of investigation, report under Section 173 
Cr.P.C. was submitted before the Trial Court. In order to prove its case the 
prosecution produced two witnesses. When examined under Section 342 
Cr.P.C., the appellant stated that he is innocent and has been falsely 
implicated in the case. However, he did not make his statement on oath 
under Section 340(2) Cr.P.C in disproof of allegations leveled against him. 
He also did not produce any evidence in his defence. 
4. 
 
Learned counsel for the appellant contended that the 
appellant has been falsely implicated in this case and the Police has 
planted a fake case upon him. Contends that the narcotic was allegedly 
recovered from the appellant in the broad daylight in a busy thoroughfare 
but none from the public was associated in the case to depose against 
him. Contends that the prosecution could not prove safe custody of the 
allegedly recovered narcotics and its safe transmission to the Police 
Station and then to the Laboratory for chemical analysis, therefore, the 
same cannot be used against the appellant to sustain his conviction. Lastly 
Criminal Appeal No. 208/2022 
3
contends that the reasons given by the learned High Court to sustain 
conviction of the appellant are speculative and artificial in nature, 
therefore, the impugned judgment may be set at naught. 
5. 
 
On the other hand, learned Law Officer has supported the 
impugned judgment. He contended that the appellant was caught red 
handed while transporting a huge quantity of narcotics, the Police officials 
had no enmity to falsely involve him in the present case and the safe 
custody of the narcotic and then its safe transmission to the Chemical 
Examiner has been proved to the hilt, therefore, he does not deserve any 
leniency by this Court.  
6. 
 
We have heard learned counsel for the parties at some 
length and have perused the evidence available on record.   
 
7. 
 
As per the prosecution story, on a spy information, a team of 
ANF officials established a picket on 25.03.2013 at Old Toll Plaza, National 
Highway, Rohri and at about 07:30 am they intercepted a Vigo Hilux 
Toyota vehicle bearing registration No. CS-8258, which was being driven 
by the appellant Zain Ali. From the secret cavities of the vehicle, 563 
kilograms of charas in shape of 563 foil packed packets, each containing 
two slabs and 1500 grams opium in the shape of three packets were 
recovered. The whole recovered opium was sealed in one parcel whereas 
40/40 kilograms of charas was separated and sealed in separate parcels. 
At the same time, 43 kilogram and 40 kilogram charas was separated and 
sealed in two parcels for the purpose of chemical examination. To prove 
the recovery, the prosecution mainly relied upon the statements of 
Inspector Tahir Ahmed, complainant (PW-1) and Aijaz Ali Shah, PC (PW-2). 
Both these witnesses have narrated the prosecution story in a natural 
manner and remained consistent throughout and their testimony could 
not be shattered by the defence despite lengthy cross-examination. The 
said witnesses had no enmity with the appellant to falsely implicate him in 
the present case. Even otherwise a huge quantity of 563 kilograms of 
contraband charas and 1500 grams of opium in no circumstances can be 
planted by the Investigating Officer of his own. As already stated above, 
Criminal Appeal No. 208/2022 
4
the whole case hinges upon the statement of the official witnesses and no 
independent witness was associated while conducting the search of the 
vehicle. However, it is well settled that testimonies of the police personnel 
are required to be treated in the same manner as the testimony of any 
other witness and there is no principle of law that without corroborating 
by the independent witnesses, their testimonies cannot be relied upon. 
This Court has time and again held that reluctance of general public to 
become witness in such like cases has become judicially recognized fact 
and there is no way out to consider statement of official witnesses, as no 
legal bar or restriction has been imposed in such regard. The presumption 
that a person acts honestly applies, as much in favour of police personnel 
as of other persons and it is not a proper judicial approach to distrust and 
suspect them without good grounds. We have minutely scrutinized the 
statements of the above witnesses and found them to be consistent, 
cogent and reliable and there is hardly any discrepancy regarding the 
recovery of narcotics from the vehicle, which was being driven by the 
appellant. Moreover, learned counsel for the appellant could not elicit any 
material contradiction in their statements so as to discredit their 
testimony. The prosecution has successfully established its case by further 
proving that the contraband so recovered from the possession of the 
appellant was weighed, packed and then sent for chemical examination, 
which on examination was found to be charas. The learned counsel for the 
appellant had argued that there are major contradictions in the 
statements of prosecution witnesses, which shatter not only their 
credibility but the very veracity of their statements. However, we could 
not find that there is any contradiction, which will impeach or affect the 
credibility of the prosecution witnesses. It is also settled that minor 
contradictions, inconsistencies, embellishments or improvements on trivial 
matters, which do not affect the core of the prosecution case, should not 
be made a ground, on which the evidence can be rejected in its entirety. 
The Court has to form its opinion about the credibility of the witness and 
record a finding as to whether his deposition inspires confidence. Mere 
marginal variations in the statement of a witness cannot be dubbed as 
improvements as the same may be elaborations of the statement made by 
Criminal Appeal No. 208/2022 
5
the witness earlier. While appreciating the evidence of a witness, the 
approach must be whether evidence of the witness read as a whole 
appears to have a ring of truth. Once that impression is formed, it is 
undoubtedly necessary for the Court to scrutinize the evidence more 
particularly keeping in view the discrepancies, draw-backs and infirmities 
pointed out in the evidence as a whole and evaluate them to find out 
whether it is against the general tenor of the evidence given by the 
witness and whether the earlier evaluation of the evidence is shaken as to 
render it unworthy of belief. However, as stated above, the prosecution 
witnesses of recovery remained firm on each and every material particular 
of the prosecution story and their testimony could not be shaken.  
8. 
 
During the course of arguments, learned counsel for the 
appellant had argued that one Suleman Haider, Constable, who deposited 
the sample parcels in the office of Chemical Examiner was not produced in 
evidence, therefore, the safe custody of the allegedly recovered narcotic 
and its safe transmission is not established. However, this argument is of 
no help to the appellant. A bare perusal of the record shows that a huge 
quantity of 563 kilograms charas and 1500 grams opium was recovered 
from the appellant on 25.03.2013. The Investigating Officer separated 83 
kilograms of charas in two separate parcels of 43/40 kilogram and sealed 
the same. The whole recovered 1500 grams opium was also separated and 
sealed in a parcel. All the three sealed sample parcels were sent to the 
office of Chemical Examiner on the very next day i.e. 26.03.2013. The 
report of the Chemical Examiner testifies this fact that the three sealed 
parcels were received on the said date, which were found to be charas and 
opium. It also came in evidence that the whole recovered narcotics, except 
the parcels which were sent to the Chemical Examiner, was produced in 
Court in sealed parcels during trial as a case property. Although, Tahir 
Ahmed, Inspector/I.O. was cross-examined by the defence at length but 
no question was put to him, which could suggest that either the whole 
recovered narcotics was not produced in Court or the same was not sealed 
in separate parcels as stated by him. Similarly, no question was put to him, 
which could suggest that the recovered narcotics was planted on the 
Criminal Appeal No. 208/2022 
6
appellant. In this view of the matter, it can safely be said that the safe 
chain of custody of the recovered narcotics was not compromised at all. 
Even otherwise, in Liaquat Ali Vs. The State (2022 SCMR 1097), this Court 
candidly held that the Control of Narcotic Substances (Government 
Analysts) Rules, 2001 virtually place no bar on the Investigating Officer to 
send the samples within a certain/specified period of time. These Rules 
are stricto sensu directory and not mandatory in any manner. It does not 
spell as to whether in case of any lapse, it would automatically become 
instrumental to discard the whole prosecution case. The Rules cannot 
control the substantive provisions of the Control of Narcotic Substances 
Act, 1997 and cannot in any manner frustrate the salient features of the 
prosecution case, which otherwise hinges upon (i) receipt of information, 
(ii) action by the concerned law enforcing agency, (iii) recovery of 
contraband narcotics, (iv) the report of chemical examiner regarding 
analysis of the recovered contraband, (v) the finding of fact by the courts 
below after recording of evidence i.e. (a) witnesses of the raiding party, (b) 
the recovery witnesses, (c) Investigating Officer and all other attending 
circumstances. Even otherwise, in terms of Section 29 of the Control of 
Narcotic Substances Act, 1997, manner and standard of proof in cases 
registered under the Act is slightly different as in terms of the said Act the 
accused is presumed to have committed the offence unless the contrary is 
proved.  
9. 
 
The menace of drugs has taken alarming dimensions in this 
country partly because of the ineffective and lackadaisical enforcement of 
the laws and procedures and cavalier manner in which the agencies and at 
times Courts of the country address a problem of such serious dimensions. 
Studies based on conferences and seminars have very often shown that 
the menace is deep rooted. This menace is a great threat to a peaceful 
society and is affecting many lives especially the youngsters, therefore, 
immediate steps are required to be taken to curb these nefarious 
activities. The proceeds of narcotics are largely utilized in anti-
state/terrorist activities, which this country is facing since decades. When 
the prosecution is able to prove its case on its salient features then un-
Criminal Appeal No. 208/2022 
7
necessary technicalities should not be allowed to hamper the very purpose 
of the law on the subject. The close analysis of the whole prosecution 
evidence i.e. the recovery of huge quantity of narcotics, the happening of 
the occurrence in broad daylight, separating the samples from each packet 
in a prescribed manner and sending them to the Chemical Examiner, 
report of the Chemical Examiner and the statements of the prosecution 
witnesses when evaluated conjointly leaves no room to come to a 
different conclusion than what has been arrived at by the learned High 
Court. The learned High Court has correctly appreciated the material 
aspects of the case and the conclusions drawn are in line with the 
guidelines enunciated by this Court on the subject. Learned counsel for the 
appellant has not been able to point out any legal or factual error in the 
impugned judgment, which could be made basis to take a different view 
from that of the learned High Court. 
10. 
 
For what has been discussed above, this appeal having no 
merit is accordingly dismissed.  
 
 
JUDGE 
 
JUDGE 
 
 
 
JUDGE 
Islamabad, the  
Announced on 24.07.2023 
Approved For Reporting 
Khurram 
 
 
