The Witnesses gave Conflicting Accounts regarding the Recovery Procedure, Preparation of Samples, and the Chain of Custody --- Lahore High Court Acquits the convicted in Narcotics Case

Islamabad 13-01-2025: In a significant ruling, the Lahore High Court, Multan Bench, acquitted Muhammad Imran in a narcotics case, overturning his conviction and life imprisonment sentence handed down by a lower Court. The appellant was previously convicted under Section 9(c) of the Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997 for allegedly possessing 19 kilograms of heroin.  

The Court, comprising Mr. Justice Ch. Abdul Aziz and Mr. Justice Sadiq Mahmud Khurram, cited multiple procedural lapses and evidentiary shortcomings by the prosecution, stating that the case against the accused was not proven beyond a reasonable doubt.  

Muhammad Imran was accused of transporting narcotics in a vehicle and was arrested in 2020. The trial Court convicted him and imposed life imprisonment along with a fine of Rs. 5,000,000. Challenging the conviction, Imran’s counsel argued that the case was riddled with contradictions and procedural errors, making the recovery and subsequent conviction dubious.  

The alleged recovery took place in a public area, yet no independent witnesses were presented by the prosecution.  

Witnesses gave conflicting accounts regarding the recovery procedure, preparation of samples, and the chain of custody.  

The prosecution failed to establish ownership or a direct connection between the accused and the vehicle used in the alleged crime.  

The prosecution could not prove the safe custody of the recovered narcotics or the integrity of its transmission to the forensic laboratory.  

The FIR and site plan were inconsistent and failed to corroborate the recovery details adequately.  

The Court clarified that the presumption of guilt under Section 29 could only apply if the prosecution conclusively proved the recovery of narcotics and its connection to the accused.   

The judgment heavily relied on precedents set in cases such as Ikramullah Vs. The State (2015 SCMR 1002), Said Wazir Vs. The State (2023 SCMR 1144), and Muhammad Imran Vs. The State (2011 SCMR 1956), which emphasize the need for an unbroken chain of custody and credible evidence in narcotics cases.   

The Court concluded that the prosecution had failed to meet the stringent requirements of evidence necessary for a conviction under the CNS Act. Muhammad Imran was acquitted, and his sentence was set aside. The Court ordered his immediate release unless required in another case.  

This ruling underscores the judiciary’s commitment to ensuring that stringent penalties under the CNS Act are supported by impeccable evidence and due process. It also highlights the necessity for meticulous adherence to procedural and evidentiary requirements in criminal trials.

Powered by Froala Editor