IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PAKISTAN 
(APPELLATE JURISDICTION) 
 
 
 
PRESENT: 
MR. JUSTICE SARDAR TARIQ MASOOD 
MR. JUSTICE SAYYED MAZAHAR ALI AKBAR NAQVI 
MR. JUSTICE JAMAL KHAN MANDOKHAIL 
 
JAIL PETITION NO. 95 OF 2017 
(On 
appeal 
against 
the 
judgment 
dated 
15.12.2016 passed by the Lahore High Court, 
Multan Bench in Criminal Appeal No. 319/2014) 
 
Faisal Shahzad 
… Petitioner 
VERSUS 
The State 
… Respondent 
 
For the Petitioner: 
Sardar Muhammad Latif Khan Khosa, Sr. ASC 
 
Syed Iqbal Hussain Shah, ASC 
 
Syed Rifaqat Hussain Shah, AOR 
 
For the State: 
Mr. Muhammad Jaffer, Addl. P.G. Punjab 
 
Date of Hearing: 
 
14.03.2022 
 
JUDGMENT 
 
SAYYED MAZAHAR ALI AKBAR NAQVI, J.- Petitioner was tried by the 
learned Additional Sessions Judge, Multan in terms of the case registered 
vide FIR No. 33/2012 under Section 9(c) of the Control of Narcotic 
Substances Act, 1997, at Police Station Daulat Gate, Multan as contraband 
charas weighing 10 kilograms and opium weighing 5 kilograms was 
recovered from him. The learned Trial Court vide its judgment dated 
30.06.2014 convicted the petitioner 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 petitioner by the learned 
Trial Court.  
Jail Petition No. 95/2017 
2
2. 
 
The prosecution story as given in the judgment of the learned 
Trial Court reads as under:- 
“2. 
Brief facts of the prosecution case as disclosed in the 
complaint Ex.PA lodged by Muhammad Saeed Akhtar Inspector are 
that on 27.02.2012 he was present at Chowk Aaam Khas Bagh 
alongwith Muhammad Hanif Tasi, Muhammad Khan Tasi, Muhammad 
Jamil, Jan Muhammad, Muhammad Khalid and Lal Khan constables 
and Muhammad Rashid driver where he received spy information that 
one person was coming from shrine of Hafiz Jamal with huge quantity 
of narcotic whereupon he constituted a raiding party and reached at 
Hafiz Jamal chowk. One person having a gatoo came from Hafiz Jamal 
Darbar. On the pointation of the informer, he was apprehended who 
disclosed his name as Faisal Shehzad. After search of the Gatoo of the 
accused Faisal Shahzad ten packets of charas and five packets of 
opium were recovered. On weigh of the charas it was found 10 kgs and 
each packet was of one kg of the charas. The opium was in the shape 
of pieces which weighed 05 kgs. Each packet was found one kg of 
opium. Ten grams of charas was separated out of recovered charas 
from each packet for chemical analysis. Likewise, ten grams of opium 
from each packet was separated out of the recovered opium for 
analysis. All the packets of charas and opium were taken into 
possession through recovery memo which is attested by the PWs. He 
then drafted the complaint and sent it to the P.S. through Muhammad 
Khalid constable for registration of the case whereupon the instant 
case was registered.”  
 
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 as many as six witnesses. When examined under 
Section 342 Cr.P.C., the petitioner stated that he is innocent and has been 
falsely implicated in the case. The petitioner firstly opted to appear as his 
own witness in terms of Section 340(2) Cr.P.C. in disproof of the allegations 
leveled against him but subsequently he refused to appear. Even he did not 
produce any evidence in his defence.  
4. 
 
Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the 
petitioner 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 petitioner 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 
Jail Petition No. 95/2017 
3
cannot be used against the petitioner to sustain his conviction. In support 
of his argument, learned counsel relied upon Qaiser Khan Vs. The State 
(2021 SCMR 363), Mst. Sakina Ramzan Vs. The State (2021 SCMR 451), 
Mst. Razia Sultana Vs. The State (2019 SCMR 1300) and  Zahir Shah Vs. The 
State (2019 SCMR 2004). Further contends that the narcotic was allegedly 
recovered from a ‘gatoo’ but the same was not produced in evidence, 
therefore, the recovery loses its relevance. In support of his argument, he 
relied on Amjad Ali Vs. The State (2012 SCMR 577). In the alternative, he 
contended that it is a case of lesser penalty, as according to him, it is only 
the basket/sack/pouch/doda of the opium, which contains narcotic 
substance but nothing is available in evidence to show as to what actually 
was recovered from the possession of the petitioner, therefore, the same 
may be considered as a mitigating circumstance. In support of his 
argument, he relied upon Zulfiqar Vs. The State (2021 SCMR 531).   
5. 
 
On the other hand, learned Law Officer has supported the 
impugned judgment. He contended that the petitioner 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.  
 
 
 
 
It is a case which was lodged with promptitude on the basis 
of spy information, which was supplied to the law enforcing agency prior 
to conducting raid by the raiding party comprising of number of police 
officials and it had already established a picket at the particular place on 
the basis of the said information. The petitioner was caught red handed by 
the Police and a huge quantity of 10 kilograms of contraband charas and 5 
kilograms of opium was recovered from him, which was contained in a 
sack/gatoo in 15 separate packets. The prosecution case hinges upon the 
statements of Falak Sher, H.C. (PW-1), Mumtaz Hussain, constable (PW-2), 
Jail Petition No. 95/2017 
4
Muhammad Asghar Tasi (PW-3), Muhammad Hanif Tasi (PW-4), Shaukat 
Hussain, SI (PW-5) and Muhammad Saeed Akhtar, Inspector (PW-6). All 
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 petitioner to falsely implicate him in the 
present case. Even otherwise a huge quantity of 10 kilograms of 
contraband charas and 5 kilograms of opium in no circumstances can be 
planted by the Investigating Officer of his own. This Court in a number of 
judgments has held that testimony of police officials is as good as any 
other private witness unless it is proved that they have animus against the 
accused. However, no such thing could be brought on record by the 
petitioner in this case. 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. 
Police officials are as good witnesses and could be relied upon, if their 
testimonies remain un-shattered during cross-examination. The police 
officials separated 10 grams of charas and 10 grams of opium from each 
packet in a prescribed manner and put the samples in 15 separate packets 
and then sent the same to the office of Chemical Examiner for its analysis. 
The reports of the Chemical Examiner show that all the 15 packets contain 
contraband charas and opium.  
7. 
 
So far as the argument of the learned counsel for the 
petitioner that the safe custody of the allegedly recovered narcotic and its 
safe transmission to the Police Station and then to the Chemical Examiner 
is not established, therefore, the same cannot be used against the 
petitioner to sustain his conviction is concerned, we have noted that the 
learned High Court in paragraph 4 of the impugned judgment has dealt 
with this issue in detail. The learned High Court after perusal of evidence 
has rightly found that on the same day when the narcotic was recovered 
from the petitioner i.e. 27.02.2012, 10 sealed sample parcels of contraband 
charas and five sealed sample parcels of opium were received by Falak 
Jail Petition No. 95/2017 
5
Sher, HC (PW-1) for safe custody. The said PW handed over the said 
samples to Mumtaz Hussain (PW-2) on 02.03.2012 alongwith road 
certificate for their onward transmission to the office of Chemical Examiner 
Multan. This fact was confirmed and testified by the said Mumtaz Hussain, 
who took the samples to the office of Chemical Examiner on the same day. 
The reports of the Chemical Examiner also testify this fact, therefore, it can 
safely be said that the safe chain of custody of the recovered narcotics was 
not compromised at all. The case law relied upon by the learned counsel 
for the petitioner in this regard is distinguishable as in the cases referred by 
him either the safe custody and transmission from the ‘maalkhana’ to the 
chemical examiner was not proved, the police constable who delivered the 
sealed samples to the Chemical Examiner was not produced in evidence  or 
his statement could not be recorded or the officer of the Anti Narcotics 
Force through whom the sample was dispatched to the Chemical Examiner 
was not produced in evidence but as discussed above the same is not the 
case here. This Court in a recent judgment passed in Jail Petition No. 
637/2016 has 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 
out that if there is any lapse, it would automatically become instrumental 
to discard the whole prosecution case. The Control of Narcotic Substances 
(Government Analysts) Rules, 2001, 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. If the series 
of acts which ultimately resulted into recovery of contraband narcotic are 
kept in juxtaposition with the alleged violation of the Rules, it cannot by 
any stretch of imagination be considered reasonable in law to smash the 
Jail Petition No. 95/2017 
6
whole prosecution case on its salient features. 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.   
8. 
 
The learned counsel argued that the narcotics was allegedly 
recovered from a ‘gatoo’/sack but the same was not produced in evidence, 
therefore, in view of the law laid down by this Court in Amjad Ali Vs. The 
State (2012 SCMR 577) the recovery loses its relevance. However, this 
argument of the learned counsel is misconceived because in Amjad Ali 
supra case 20 kilograms charas was recovered from a spare wheel of the 
car, which was not produced in evidence and this Court considered its 
production in evidence necessary only to verify as to whether could it 
contain such a huge quantity of narcotics in question. In the present case 
the petitioner was carrying narcotics in a sack/’gatoo’, which is usually 
made of polythene/cloth/plastic and is commonly used by the people in our 
society to carry heavy things and the same can easily carry a weight of 15 
kilograms. The ‘gatoo’ is just a cloth or plastic bag, so the real thing to look 
at is that the petitioner was carrying a huge quantity of narcotics in it, 
therefore, the non-production of the gatoo is of no avail to the petitioner.  
In the alternative, learned counsel had prayed that it’s a case of lesser 
punishment and in support of his argument, he has placed reliance on 
Zulfiqar Vs. State (2021 SCMR 531). However, we have noted that in the 
said Zulfiqar supra case, 15 kilograms of poast/opium was recovered from 
the accused and nothing was brought on record as to whether was it only 
the doda/basket/pouch or was it the whole poppy plant. This Court while 
holding that it is only the basket/sack/pouch also known as ‘doda’ 
excluding the seed, which contains narcotics, considered it as a mitigating 
circumstance and reduced the quantum of punishment. However, in the 
present case a huge quantity of 10 kilograms of contraband charas and 5 
kilograms of opium was recovered in pure form from the possession of the 
petitioner. Even if we keep aside the recovery of 5 kilograms of opium for 
the reason that it is unknown as to in which shape the opium was 
Jail Petition No. 95/2017 
7
recovered, even then the recovery of 10 kilograms of contraband charas 
alone is sufficient to sustain the conviction of the petitioner.  
9. 
 
This Court has time and again held that the menace of drugs 
is increasing day by day due to various reasons. It is very disheartening to 
observe that every day there are many reports of drug peddlers being 
caught with drugs. 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-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 courts below.  
10. 
 
For what has been discussed above, this petition having no 
merit is accordingly dismissed and leave to appeal is refused.  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
JUDGE 
 
JUDGE 
 
 
 
JUDGE 
Islamabad, the  
14th of March, 2022 
Approved For Reporting 
Khurram