Yameen vs State S — 2025 YLR 2042 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH

Fields are extracted from the reported citation and judgment text. Where a detail is not stated in the record, it is not shown.

Yameen VS State S. 9(1), Sr. No. 3(c)--- Control of Narcotic Substances (Government Analysts) Rules, 2001, R. 4(2) --- Possession and transportation of charas---Appreciation of evidence---Accused was charged for having in possession 3000-grams charas---Fundamental obligation of the prosecution in narcotics cases was to establish an unbroken chain of custody, ensuring that each stop in the recovery, handling and examination of the seized substances was accounted for---In the present case, the prosecution successfully discharged that burden by producing documentary evidence and the testimonies of relevant witnesses corroborated that the narcotic substance was lawfully seized and subsequently examined by the chemical laboratory incharge---In order to prove the case, prosecution had examined all the material witnesses placed all the material documents showing that chain of custody---Prosecution examined SIP, who produced entry of departure No.11, memo. of arrest and recovery and FIR---Inspection report of the crime scene had been produced by Police Constable, who acted as mashir---Investigating Officer had produced all relevant entries, he also produced criminal record of the appellant/accused and the chemical examination report---Custodian of Malkhana produced Entry No. 16 and as the last carrier of the case property, Police Constable was also examined---Thus, the prosecution by producing said evidence successfully discharged its burden---No material contradiction had been noted in their cross examinations by the High Court after carefully scanning the same---All material prosecution witnesses withstood cross examination without deviation from their initial statements---Chemical Examiner Report confirmed the presence of charas, which was sent to Chemical Examiner by the prosecution within 72 hours in compliance with the statutory requirement of R.4(2) of the Control of Narcotic Substances (Government Analysts) Rules, 2001---Prosecution's witnesses being members of the raiding party were natural witnesses and their testimony could not be discarded merely on the ground that they were the employees of police force---Appellant had failed to demonstrate any animosity or ill will towards the prosecution witnesses---Absence of any established enmity or plausible motive for false implication served as significant circumstance supporting the case against the accused---Appeal against conviction was dismissed, in circumstances.

Yameen vs State S — 2025 YLR 2042 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2025 YLR