2021 Y L R 2282
(a) Control of Narcotic Substances Act (XXV of 1997)---
----S.9(c)---Control of Narcotic Substances (Government Analysts) Rules, 2001, R.6---Possession of narcotics---Report of test or analysis---Appreciation of evidence---Benefit of doubt---Non-mentioning of full protocols---Effect---Accused was alleged to have been found in possession of 1050 grams of charas---Report of Forensic Laboratory did not give the details of the full protocols and the test applied at the time of analysis of sample of narcotic---Rule 6 of the Control of Narcotic Substances (Government Analysts) Rules, 2001, had made it imperative on the analyst to mention result of material analyzed with full protocols applied thereon along with other details in the report---Single circumstance creating reasonable doubt was sufficient to cast doubt about the veracity of prosecution case and the benefit of said doubt has to be extended in favour of the accused not as a matter of grace or concession but as a matter of right---Appeal against conviction was allowed, in circumstances.
(Naeem)
(b) Control of Narcotic Substances Act (XXV of 1997)---
----S. 9---Possession of narcotics---Appreciation of evidence---Benefit of doubt---Scope---Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997, provides stringent punishments, therefore, the proof has to be construed strictly and the benefit of any doubt in the prosecution case must be extended to the accused.
(c) Criminal trial---
---Harder the sentence, stricter the standard of proof.
(d) Control of Narcotic Substances Act (XXV of 1997)---
----S. 36--- Control of Narcotic Substances (Government Analysts) Rules, 2001, R. 6---Report of Government Analyst---Report of test or analysis---Scope---Any report failing to describe in it, the details of the full protocols and the tests applied will be inconclusive, unreliable, suspicious and untrustworthy and will not meet the evidentiary presumption attached to a report of the Government Analyst under S.36(2) of Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997.
0 Comments