THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH AT KARACHI

Criminal Jail Appeal No. 132 of 2025

Present:      Mr. Justice Omar Sial

                                                                                                                        Mr. Justice Shamsuddin Abbasi

Appellant                   :          Tariq Muhammad Hayyat through Pir Syed Kashif Ali Rizvi, advocate

Respondent               :           The State through Mr. Habib Ahmed, Special Prosecutor ANF

Date of Hearing        :          15.04.2026

Date of Judgment     :          23.04.2026

JUDGMENT

SHAMSUDDIN ABBASI, J.- Appellant Tariq Muhammad Hayyat was tried by learned Judge, Special Court No.II (CNS), Karachi in Special Case No.47 of 2022. On conclusion of trial, vide judgment dated 16.12.2024, appellant was convicted under Section 9(c) of the CNS Act 1997 and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for life and to pay of a fine of Rs.50,000/-, in default whereof to undergo S.I. for one month more. Appellant was extended benefit of Section 382(b) Cr.PC.

2.         Brief facts of the prosecution case are that on 21.04.2022 at about 1130 hours ANF officials arrested the present appellant, carrying travelling bag in his hand, containing charas, weighing 19 Kgs., hence the subject FIR.  

3.         During investigation, charss was sent to chemical examiner, positive report of chemical examiner was received. On conclusion of investigation, challan was submitted against the appellant under the above referred sections. Trial Court framed Charge against the appellant at Ex.5, to which appellant pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.

4.         At trial, prosecution examined PW-1, Incharge Malkhana at Ex.7 and PW-2 complainant/IO at Ex.8. Thereafter, accused file application, wishing to plead guilty at Ex.9; trial Court issued show cause notice to appellant at Ex.10, who replied to the same at Ex.11. Statement of appellant under section 364, Cr.PC was recorded at Ex.12, responding thereto, the Prosecution closed prosecution side vide statement at Ex.13. Thereafter, statement of accused under Section 342, Cr.PC was recorded at Ex.14. However, learned trial Court, after hearing the accused/respondent No.2 as well as learned Prosecutor convicted the appellant for offence under sections 9(c) of the CNS Act, 1997 and sentenced him to suffer the term of R.I. for life and to pay fine Rs.50,000/-, in default whereof to undergo S.I. for one month more, with benefit of section 382-B, Cr.PC, for the period which he has already undergone as under trial prisoner in said case. Hence, the instant appeal against the impugned judgment.

5.         Appellant made a written request through Superintendent, Central Prison and Correctional Facility, Sukkur for providing services of defence counsel on State expenses, which facility was provided to him by appointing Pir Syed Kashif Ali Rizvi, advocate, on State expenses to assist the Court vide order dated 23.12.2025.

6.         Learned advocate for appellant after arguing the appeal at some length, did not press the same on merits but submits that lenient view in the sentence of appellant may be taken on the ground that appellant is are young person, he is sole supporter of his old parents and family. It is also submitted that appellant is not a previous convict and he intends to reform his life.

7.         Learned Special Prosecutor ANF argued that prosecution has succeeded in proving its case against the appellants.

8.         We have carefully heard learned counsels and perused the entire evidence available on record. From perusal of evidence it transpires that prosecution has successfully proved its case against the appellant beyond any shadow of reasonable doubt. Appellant was found in possession of 19 Kgs. of chars and report of chemical examiner is positive. Evidence of ANF officials on material particulars of the case is trustworthy and confidence inspiring. It is matter of record that these witnesses were subjected to the lengthy cross-examination but nothing favourable to appellant, except minor discrepancies, could be sucked. In these circumstances, we have no hesitation to hold that trial Court has rightly appreciated the evidence according to settled principles of law as such conviction and sentence recorded by the trial Court vide judgment dated 16.12.2024 requires no interference by this Court. Resultantly conviction is maintained.

9.         In the present case, appellant was convicted on the ground that after recording of evidence he confessed his guilt before learned trial Court and the learned trial Court issued show cause notice to him as to why he may not be convicted. He filed reply to the show cause notice and has taken same stance to plead guilty, however, his statements under Sections 364 Cr.PC and 342 Cr.PC were also recorded wherein he constantly taken same stance and no room was left for the learned trial Court but to convict him. Learned trail Court has rightly convicted the appellant and sentenced him to rigorous imprisonment for life and to pay fine of Rs.50,000/-, in default whereto to undergo S.I. for one month more. Looking to the above legal position we do not see any illegality or irregularity committed by learned trial Court while convicting and sentencing the appellant in the instant case.

10.       So far as the quantum of sentence is concerned, the alleged incident occurred on 21.04.2022 and as per proviso to clause (c) of Section 9 of the Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997, “if the quantity exceeds ten kilograms the punishment shall not be less than imprisonment for life”.

11.       For the above stated reasons, appeal is dismissed on merits.

                                                                                                                        J U D G E

                                                            J U D G E  

Gulsher/PS