Fairness of the Recovery Process in Narcotics Case

CRIMINAL LAW

Assad Ullah Jaral

2/13/20242 min read

green and blue plant in close up photography
green and blue plant in close up photography

In Criminal Appeal No. 549 of 2023, the Lahore High Court reviewed the case of Nayyar Abbas, who was convicted under Section 9(c) of the Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997, for possessing 2250 grams of charas. The trial court had sentenced him to five years and six months of rigorous imprisonment along with a fine. The appeal challenged this conviction.

Key Issues:

Procedural Irregularities in Recovery Memo: The primary issue revolved around the discrepancies in the recovery memo prepared by the police, which lacked the FIR number, date, and the name of the police station. This raised questions about the authenticity and timing of the recovery memo.

Non-Compliance with Legal Requirements: The defense argued that the preparation of the recovery memo did not comply with mandatory legal provisions, casting doubt on the fairness of the recovery process.

Benefit of Doubt in Criminal Jurisprudence: The defense highlighted that any doubt arising from procedural lapses should benefit the accused as a matter of right, not grace.

Case Law: In Zafar Khan vs. The State (2022 SCMR 864), the necessity of preparing recovery memo in the presence of witnesses to ensure transparency is emphasized. The State vs. Fayaz Khan (PLD 2019 Federal Shariat Court 21) highlighted the importance of proper documentation in recovery processes. In the matter of Muhammad Imran vs. The State (2020 SCMR 857), the principle that any reasonable doubt in a criminal case should benefit the accused is reinforced.

Court’s Analysis:

Procedural Deficiencies: The court noted significant procedural lapses, particularly the absence of critical information on the recovery memo. Witnesses, including the complainant (PW-1) and the recovery witness (PW-3), admitted during cross-examination that the FIR number and other details were not recorded at the time of recovery.

Legal Compliance: The court emphasized that compliance with Section 103 Cr.P.C. and relevant provisions of the Control of Narcotic Substances Act is crucial. The failure to include two respectable inhabitants of the locality during the recovery process was a significant procedural lapse.

Benefit of Doubt: The court reiterated the fundamental principle of criminal jurisprudence that any reasonable doubt should be resolved in favor of the accused. The procedural lapses and inconsistencies in the recovery process created sufficient doubt to warrant the appellant's acquittal.

Conclusion: The Lahore High Court found the procedural irregularities in the recovery process and the lack of compliance with mandatory legal provisions sufficient to overturn Nayyar Abbas's conviction. The court set aside the conviction and sentence, ordering his immediate release unless required in another case.

Contact Us:

For expert legal assistance in narcotics cases, criminal appeals, and ensuring compliance with procedural laws, contact AUJ LAWYERS LLP. Our experienced team in Lahore is dedicated to safeguarding your rights and ensuring justice. Feel free to contact us for further legal assistance or queries regarding this case.

We are here to help

Talk to our lawyers today. We tailor our services around your legal needs so that we can reach the desired outcome together.