Muhammad Ismail and another V. The State,

PCrLJ 2015 974Balochistan High CourtCriminal Law2015

Bench: Muhammad Kamran Khan Malakhail

Share on WhatsApp
2015 P Cr. L J 974 [Balochistan] Before Muhammad Noor Meskanzai and Muhammad Kamran Khan Mulakhail, JJ MUHAMMAD ISMAIL and another ---Petitioners versus The STATE---Respondent Criminal Revision No.25 of 2014, decided on 24th July, 2014. Control of Narcotic Substances Act (XXV of 1997) --- ----Preamble, Ss. 2(k)(s)(za), 9(c) & 16---Drugs Act (XXXI of 1976), Ss.23 & 28---Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), S.221---Possessing or trafficking narcotics ---Recovery of alcohol, beer and acid ---Framing of charge ---Alcohol, beer and acid, were recovered from the vehicle and FIR under Ss.23 & 28 of the Drugs Act, 1976 was lodged against accused---Application of accused filed under S.221, Cr.P.C. for framing charge under S.16 of Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997, having been rejected by the Trial Court ---Validity ---Recovered liquid, which had been identified as 'Hydrochloride Acid (HCL)', used as chemical regent in laboratory experiments, did not fall within the definitions of "controlled subs tance", "narcotic drug" and "Psychotropic substance" as provided in S.2(k)(s)(za) of Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997---Recovered liquid not falling within the mischief of S.9(c) of Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997, nor coming under any def inition of the contraband item/substance, order passed by the Trial Court/Special Court, whereby application of accused filed under S.221, Cr.P.C. was rejected, was set aside---Trial Court was directed to alter the charge and to frame the same for an offen ce punishable under S.16 of Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997, thereafter to proceed with the case strictly in accordance with law. Zahoor Ahmed Mengal for Petitioners. Abdul Sattar Durrani, Additional Prosecutor -General for the State. Date of hearing: 26th June, 2014. ORDER MUHAMMAD KAMRAN KHAN MULAKHAIL, J. ---This Criminal Revision Petition, under section 439 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1898 ("Cr.P.C .") is directed against the order dated 27 -3-2014 passed by the learned Special Judge (CNS)/Sessions Judge Noshki, ("trial Court"), whereby the application under section 221, Cr.P.C. filed by the petitioner for framing of charge under section 16 of Control of Narcotics Substances Act, 1997 ("CNS Act") was rejected. 2. The relevant facts for disposal of the instant petition are that FIR No.13 of 2014 was lodged with police station Noshki under section 23 read with section 28 of the Drugs Act, 1976 on the M arasla sent by the complainant/SI/SHO Muhi -ud-Din, alleging therein that on the stated date time and place a Coach bearing Registration No.JA -4955 was signaled to stop. During the search from the said vehicle 94 bottles Alcohol, 40 tins of beer and 48 Jeri -cans of Acid (containing 30 liters each) were recovered and taken into possession, whereas the driver namely Muhammad Ismail and cleaner Waheed Ahmed were arrested on the spot. 3. After completion of investigation the challan of the case was submitted b efore the trial Court and charge was framed against the appellants on 27- 3-2014 to which they did not plead guilty and claimed trial. On the same date the learned trial Court vide order impugned herein dismissed the afore -referred application filed by the petitioner. The learned trial Court in para No.8 of the impugned order, while dismissing the application under section 221, Cr.P.C. for framing the charge of an offence under section 16 of the C.N.S. Act, observed as under: "Without touching the meri ts of the case, the suspected liquor were chemically examined and declared by the Government Analyst in his report as Hydrochloric Acid (HCL), admittedly the alleged liquor are not attracting in the schedule of psychotropic substances, but the liquor safel y comes in the definition of controlled substances, the transport of psychotropic or controlled substances are conditional, the law specified the delivery of any narcotics drugs or other substance for medical, scientific or industrial purpose subject to the permission or licence [sic], in the instant case no licence [sic] or permission was obtained from the competent authority." 4. Mr. Zahoor Ahmed, Advocate for the petitioner at the very outset referred to the chemical analysis report (page 41) and conte nded that the recovered substance was chemically examined on 26- 2-2014, which concluded that the recovered substance is 'Hydrochloric Acid (HCL)', which is used 'as chemical regent in laboratory experiments'. He further added that on receipt of chemical an alysis report it was confirmed on record that the liquid so recovered does not fall within the purview of psychotropic substance, therefore, is not included in the schedule appended to the C.N.S. Act. He argued that section 16 of the C.N.S. Act, might be a ttracted in the petitioner's case, which provides a punishment for offence, "for which no punishment is provided". He maintained that the learned trial Court erred in law and wrongly opined that the recovered substance falls within the purview of controlle d substances, therefore, the transportation thereof shall be governed under valid license/permit. He contended that the law is silent in this behalf and the observation made by the learned trial Court is not supported by any provision of law, which for the time being is enforced in the country. He finally urged for setting aside the impugned order and prayed that in such view of the fact, the learned trial court may be directed to alter the charge. 5. Mr. Abdul Sattar Durrani, the learned Additional Prose cutor General strongly opposed the contention and supported the impugned order. 6. We have heard the respective parties and have gone through the record of the case. In order to better understand the controversy, it would be instructive to reproduce the preamble of the CNS Act, which runs as under: "Whereas it is expedient to consolidate and amend the laws relating to narcotic drugs, psychotropic substances, and control the production, processing and trafficking of such drugs and substances." Keepin g in view the preamble of the CNS Act it would be helpful to reproduce the relevant definition clauses of the CNS Act, which provide as under: "2. Definitions (k) "controlled substance" means any substance which may be used for the production or manuf acture of narcotic drugs or psychotropic substance; (s) "narcotic drug" means coca leaf cannabis heroin, opium, poppy straw and all manufactured drugs; (za) "psychotropic substance" means the substances, specified in the Schedule to this Act and such substances as the Federal Government may, by notification in the official Gazette, declare to be a psychotropic substance." The afore referred definitions clearly distingui sh the contraband substances, therefore, the recovered liquid, which has been identified as HCL does not fall within the definition of either of the aforesaid definitions provided in the CNS Act, however, it is instructive to refer the definition and usage of HCL as provided in "The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition updated in 2009 by "Houghton Mifflin Company", which runs as under: "Definition A clear, colorless, fuming, poisonous, highly acidic aqueous solution of hydrogen chloride, HC1, used as a chemical intermediate and in petroleum production, ore reduction, food processing, pickling, and metal cleaning. It is found in the stomach in dilute form" Ref Usage: (1) To 'pickle' steel. This is a process whereby rust and scale is removed from steel sheet or coil with the use of a dilute solution of Hydrochloric Acid. The metal can then be processed. (2) To manufacture organic compounds such as Vinyl Chloride and Dichloroethane which are used to produce PVC (Poly Vinyl Chloride). (3) To regulate the pH level in a wide range of manufacturing and treatment processes including the production of drinking water, pharmaceuticals, beverages and foods. (4) In the processing of additives for the food industry including fructose, citric acid and hydrolyzed vegetable protein. (5) To produce inorganic compounds for water treatment including drinking water and waste water. (6) To neutralize the water in swimming pools making it safe for bathers. (7) To regenerate ion exchangers. (8) To process leathers in the tanning industry. (9) To purify common salt. (10) In North Sea oil production where it is used to facilitate oil well acidizing. This chemical is also known as Muriatic Acid or Spirits of Salt. It is commonly referred to by its chemical formula HCl. This chemical is also known as Muriatic Acid or Spirits of Salt. It is commonly referred to by its chemical formula HCl. Hydrochl oric Acid varies in strength, therefore as precautionary measures it is advisible that one must wear PPE (Personal Protective Equipment) including approved eye protection, compatible safety gloves, safety boots and safety coveralls. Concentrated Hydrochlor ic Acid should be handled under fume extraction. Since, the recovered liquid does not fall in either of the definitions of contraband substances, provided in CNS Act, while the FIR in the instant case was instantly lodged under sections 23 and 28 of the Drug Act, 1976, it appears that after registration of FIR and on failure of Investigating Officer to justify the registration of case the challan of the case has been submitted under the CNS Act, but keeping in view the submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and the prayer made in the petition we refrain ourselves to render any observation on merits of the case. However, we are of the considered opinion that the recovered liquid does not fall within the mischief of section 9(c) of the CN S, Act nor it comes under any definition of the contraband item/substance. Therefore, the impugned order dated 27- 3-2014 passed by the learned Special Judge (CNS)/Sessions Judge Noshki is hereby set aside and the application under section 221, Cr.P.C. filed by the petitioner is accepted. The learned trial Court is directed to alter the charge and to reframe the same for an offence punishable under section 16 of the C.N.S. Act and thereafter to proceed with the case strictly in accordance with law. HBT/ 37/Bal. Order accordingly.
This judgment is reproduced from a publicly available source for informational purposes and does not constitute legal advice. If you believe this listing contains an error, let us know.

Related judgments

Re-Investigation can be permitted under special circumstances

PLJ 2020 · Balochistan High Court · 2020

Importance of 342 Statement in a Criminal Trial

PLJ 2018 SC 453 · Balochistan High Court · 2018

Prosecution must establish that chain of custody was unbroken, unsuspicious, indubitable, safe and secure

PLJ 2018 SC (Cr.C.) 90 · Balochistan High Court · 2018

Domicile and Residence Certificate are different

PLJ 2013 · Balochistan High Court · 2013

Pakistan - The Registration Act 1908

Balochistan High Court · 2012