IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH AT KARACHI

Criminal Appeal No.11 of 2024

Present: Mr. Justice Omar Sial

Mr. Justice Shamsuddin Abbasi

----------------------------------------

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

Respondent No.2: Mattiullah son of Muhammad Hassan through Ms. Amna Usman, advocate

Date of hearing: 01.04.2026

Date of Judgment: 23.04.2026

J U D G M E N T

SHAMSUDDIN ABBASI, J. --- This Criminal Appeal has been preferred by the appellant for enhancement of sentence awarded by the order dated 07.11.2023, passed by learned Special Judge, Court-I, CNS, Karachi in Special Case No.51/2020, whereby, in view of plea of guilty, Respondent No.2 was convicted for an offence under sections 6/9(c), 14, 15 of the CNS Act, 1997 and sentenced to suffer the term of R.I. for 20 years and to pay fine Rs.100,000/-, in default whereof to undergo S.I. for 12 months more, with benefit of section 382-B of Cr.PC, for the period which he has already undergone as under trial prisoner in said case.

2. Briefly the facts of the prosecution case are that on 23.9.2020, complainant received spy information from high ups that International smuggler namely Haji Naimtullah through his agent Mattiullah is trying to supply huge quantity of narcotics substances by a Truck bearing Registration No.JT-0107, white color at about 11.30 to 12.30 from Quetta to Karachi to which the complainant alongwith subordinate staff reached at the place of incident, stopped the said Truck and arrested the accused on spot, who disclosed about drug into tool box at left side of driving seat and by himself opened the tool box, resulting recovery of 207 packets wrapped by solution tape and 05 packets of black clothes made, total 212 packets were checked by making cut on them and 149 packets in yellow solution tape wrapped; there was charas in the form of slab in plastic bag and 58 yellow tape wrapped recovered, while opium was found in five black cloth bags were recovered. Weight of 149 packets of charas by electric scale came 1200/1200 grams from each packet, while 58 double slab packets were weighed as 1000/1000 grams from each packet. The total weight was 236.800 Kgs and five packets of opium weight was 06.00 Kgs. Hence the subject FIR under sections 6/9(c), 14, 15 of the Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997.

3. After completing all the formalities, report under section 173, Cr.P.C. was submitted before the trial Court and charge was framed on 04.05.2021 at Ex.2, to which the appellant pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

4. After framing of charge, respondent No.2 filed application for pleading guilty before learned trial Court, which was taken on record at Ex.4; show cause notice was issued to respondent No.2 by learned trial Court at Ex.5, to which respondent No.2 submitted his reply at Ex.6. However, learned trial Court, after hearing the accused/respondent No.2 as well as learned S.P.P. convicted the appellant for offence under sections 6/9(c), 14, 15 of the CNS Act, 1997 and sentenced him to suffer the term of R.I. for 20 years and to pay fine Rs.100,000/-, in default whereof to undergo S.I. for 12 months more, with benefit of section 382-B, Cr.PC, for the period which he has already undergone as under trial prisoner in said case. Being aggrieved, the State through ANF filed instant Criminal Appeal for enhancement of sentence against respondent No.2.

5. The notice was issued to respondent No.2 through District Jail Malir, where he was confined and on his request advocate for pauper respondent was provided to him on State expenses to assist the Court.

6. It is inter alia contended by the learned Special Prosecutor for ANF that the impugned order is illegal, unlawful and contrary to law and has been passed in a hasty manner, without applying the judicial mind; that offence committed by the accused is heinous in nature and the learned trial Court while passing the impugned order has neglected/ignored the quantum of sentence provided for commission of offence under Section 9(c) of the Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997; that in Ghulam Murtaza case, reported as PLD 2009 Lahore 362, punishment for offence involving quantity of narcotics more than 10 Kg. is provided as life imprisonment or death penalty, with fine of Rs.100,000/- but the learned trial Court without considering the same has awarded lesser punishment to the accused, which is against the sentencing policy; that the trial Court has not followed the guideline provided in the case of Ghulam Murtaza and others. Lastly, he prayed for enhancement of the sentence.

7. Learned counsel for respondent No.2 Mattiullah contended that impugned order was passed in accordance with law; that respondent No.2 is first offender and there is no previous criminal record of appellant; that he is sole bread earner of his family and that the learned trial Court has rightly taken lenient view on humanitarian grounds, therefore, appeal for enhancement of sentence is not maintainable.

8. We have heard the learned Special Prosecutor for ANF as well as learned counsel for respondent No.2/accused and have gone through the material available on record.

9. In this case, the State/ANF made prayer through the instant Criminal Appeal regarding enhancement of the sentence of the respondent No.2. Perusal of record reveals that learned trial Court has awarded the sentence below the statutory minimum prescribed under the Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997. Learned trial Court, while recording lesser sentence from the statutory minimum has cited the case reported as PLD 2017 SC 671 (State through Deputy Director (Law), Regional Directorate, Anti-Narcotics Force vs. Mujahid Naseem Lodhi), such practice reflects a misuse of judicial discretion, which undermines the deterrent purpose of the CNS Act. In the instant case, respondent No.2 has been found guilty of possessing contraband, weighing 236.800 Kg charas and 6 Kg. opium, which is in excess of ten kilograms; evidence of recovery and forensic report is inexorably pointed upon his culpability. We cannot ignore the fact that a huge quantity of narcotics was recovered from the possession of the respondent, thus in such circumstances, he was liable to be sentenced to imprisonment for life, with fine of rupees eight hundred thousand and in case of default of payment of fine, he shall suffer S.I. for one year more. Magnanimity shown by learned trial Court being outside the remit of law merits recall. Reliance in this context is placed on the cases of 2019 SCMR 1122 (State through Director ANF Peshawar vs. Fakhar Zaman) 2019 SCMR 1288 (State through Director ANF Peshawar vs. Sohail Khan).

10. For the afore-stated reasons, instant appeal for enhancement of sentence awarded to accused/respondent No.2 Mattiullah son of Muhammad Hassan is allowed; impugned judgments to the extent of quantum of sentence is set aside and the appellant is sentenced to Imprisonment for life.

J U D G E

Gulsher/PS