The State. Vs.

Najeebullah

STATEMENT OF MUHAMMAD IMRAN HUSSAIN, LEARNED

ADPP, WITHOUT OATH.

I give up Imtiaz Hussain 1144-C being un-

necessary and while tendering the report of PFSA Ex.PE,

close the prosecution evidence.

(Ch. Zia Ullah)

R.O.&.A.C. Addl.Sessions Judge,
23.11.2015. Jhang.
.
 The State vs Najeebullah

Learned ADPP submitted that the accused was

apprehended by the police on a spy information.
Norcatics in shape of herion and charas was recovered
from the accused which was made into sealed parcel.
Their specimens were separated and were sent to PFSA.
Both the specimens were found charas and herion
respectively vide reported Ex.PE. I.o also recovered
Rs.2000/- from the accused which might be a sale
amount. Private person do not come forward to become a
witness in such like cases, therefore, police
officials should also be considered as good witnesses
as that of other citizens of Pakistan. The police has
no animosity at all with the accused and the
prosecution has successfully proved its case against
the accused.
On the other hand, learned defence
counsel submitted that the case against the accused is
baseless and fasle and result of enmity of police with
the accused and his family. Learned defence counsel
further contended that I.o of this case remained
failed even disclosed the date or time of its
departure from the police station for alleged
patrolling. I.o had also not annexed the copy of
rappat of daily diary register to prove the factum of
his departure and arrival on the day of occurrence;
Learned defence counsel went on saying that the
alleged recovery was effected from a thickly populated
area in front of numerous shops but none from the
private persons was joined into investigation which
speaks volumes that the story of the prosecution is
pack of lies. Even otherwise story of the prosecution
is against the natural human conduct because it was
admitted by the i.o that from the place of recovery
till Vadhan Bangala which is at the distance of two
kilo meter. The road is straight and the raid was
conducted on a police vehicle. It is unbeliable that a
person having narcotics in his hand remained standing
on the road while a police vehicle was proceedings
towards him. Learned defence counsel further submitted
that it is case of the prosecution that after seeing

2
 The State vs Najeebullah

the police and trying to flee away, the accused did

not even threw the shopper allegedly carried by him
having narcotics in it which also runs counter to the
natural course of events. Learned defence counsel
further contended that when a question was put to the
recovery witness P.w.1 regarding the shape of
narcotics whether the same are in pieces or slaps, he
replies that he has no idea which also shows that the
recovery was fake and was even planted in the absence
of Pw.1. The same question was put to the i.O Pw.2 but
he remained failed to answer the said question and
made different statements in this regard. Learned
defence counsel further contended that when a question
was put to the recovery witness regarding weights used
in weighing the narcotics he replied that he had no
idea where from the I.o had brought weights for
weighing the specimen. This fact also shows that the
story of raid and recovery of narcotics baseless and
false. An other aspect excludes the presence of Pw.1
because he is Muhammad Ejaz and he stated that he has
never told or written his name as Ejaz Hussain but the
recovery memo contained his name as Ejaz hussain and
not Muhammad Ejaz. Learned defence counsel submitted
that the prosecution has no legs to stand because the
i.o in his examination in chief and even during cross
examination stated that the complaint and all the
recovery memos were prepared by him and all the said
documents are in his hand but when learned defence
counsel requested the court to supply a pin and paper
to the witness for comparison of his writing he stated
that none of the documents were in his hand writing
meaning thereby all the fake proceedings were prepared
by some one while sitting at the police station under
the instruction of Rana Khalid Rahseed and the present
Pws were painted as witnesses in this case. The
alleged recovered amount was not produced before the
court and other case property was not narcotics. The
parcel of charas was desealed and the same was found
in 100 of pieces and I.o has no idea as to from which
piece the specimen was separated even the biggest

3
 The State vs Najeebullah

piece when weighed was less than one hundred grams.

Learned defence counsel further contended that when
the accused was produced before the learned Magistrate
he requested the court that he was innocent and his
statement was not correctly recorded by the i.O and on
the orders of learned Magistrate, version of the
accused was recorded who stated that he is innocent
and was arrested from Lala Zar Colony to pressurize
him for effecting compromise in FIR no.1436/2010 with
Rana Rustum former SHO. A question was put to the i.o
that whether he had even any opinion regarding the
falsity or truthfulness of the version of the accused,
he replied *No. Pw.2 himself is complainant of the
case and was also the investigating officer and it is
never aspected from the complainant to opined against
his own complaint. That is why a question was put to
him whether he got his investigation verified from any
senior police officer including DSP/SDPO, the answer
was No. Learned defence counsel prayed for the
acquittal of the accused on the above said grounds.

The State. Vs. Najeebullah

4
 The State vs Najeebullah

Pw.5. STATEMENT OF TALIB HUSSAIN 760-C PRESENTLY

POSTED AT POLICE STATION MOCHIWALA, JHANG,
ON OATH.

On 28.01.2015 I was posted at P.s Mochiwala and on the

same day Moharrar handed over to me two sealed parcel
containing charas and herion for onwards transmission to the office
of PFSA. On 29.01.2015 I deposited the same parcel to the concern
office. I.o recorded my statement under section 161 Cr.PC
X x x x x x x x Makhdum Majeed Hussain, Advocate learned
defence counsel.
My statement was not recorded on 28.01.2015. I came
to the police station on 29.01.2015. My statement was not recorded
on 29.01.2015. It is incorrect to suggest that I have deposed falsely.

R.O.&.A.C. Addl.Sessions Judge,

23.11.2015. Jhang.

5
 The State vs Najeebullah

The State. Vs. Najeebullah

Pw.1. STATEMENT OF Muhammad Ejaz ASI PRESENTLY

POSTED AT P.S MOCHIWALA, JHANG, ON OATH.

On 19.01.2015 I was posted at P.s Mochiwala. On the same

day, I was present alongwith Azhar Khan SI, Imtiaz Hussain 1144-
C, Azhar Hussain 776-C at Adda Gojra Mor, Jhang in connection
with patrolling. We received spy information regarding the
presence of Najeebullah accused. We reached at Adda Madahni
Jut, Najeeb Ullah tried to escape but we apprehended to him. He
was keeping a shopper in his hand which was checked by us. The
said shopper contained charas and heroin which was weighed by
us, charas was 1100 grams P.1 and heroin was 500 grams P.2. We
also searched him and found a valet, a cell phone and Rs.2000/-
from his personal search. Currency notes were in the denomination
of two notes of Rs.1000/- and one currency note of Rs.500/- again
said one note of Rs.1000/- and one note of Rs.500/- was found. I.O
took into possession one gram of specimen of heroin and 10 grams
of charas made the same into sealed parcel. I.O prepared parcels of
specimen and case properties, took the same into possession vide
recovery memo Ex.PA which was attested by me and Imtiaz
Hussain. I.O also recorded my statement under section 161 cr.PC

6
 The State vs Najeebullah

X x x x x x x x Makhdum Majeed Hussain, Advocate learned

defence counsel.
We left the police station for patrolling early in the
morning. Firstly we went towards Chambrawali and thereafter
Saeed Abad and finally at Gojra Mor. The informer informed us
about the presence of Najeeb Ullah accused about 10 minutes after
our arrival at Gojra Mor. We did not ask the informer to
accompany us. Gojra Mor is a thickly populated area having
numerous shops. We did not associate any private person from
Gojra Mor after receiving spy information. I do not know that if we
had informed about receiving information and proceedings
towards Madhani Jut. While going towards Madhani Jut, P.S
Mochiwala falls on the way. We did not opt to inform at the police
station regarding raid. Adda Gojra mor is six kilometer away from
Adda Madhani Jut and not 10 kilometer as suggested. The informer
who had informed us was on foot. Adda Madhani Jut is situated at
a very busy road having traffic of all the kinds around the clock.
Vahedon Bangla is at a distance of 2 kilo meters from Adda
Madhani Jut and is situated towards eastern side of Adda Madhani
Jut in the direction wherefrom we were coming at Adda Madhani
Jut. The road in between Vahedon Bangla and Adda Madhani Jut
is straight. We were in an official vehicle. There are many shops at
Adda Madhani Jut. I do not know as to from what distance we had
seen Najeebullah accused. Pw volunteered that Azhar Khan SI can
tell because he was sitting on front seat of the vehicle. When the
vehicle stopped near Najeebullah accused he tried to escape but
was apprehended. Azhar Khan SI apprehended him. After seeing
police official he did not try to throw the shopper. We did not
associate any person in the recovery proceedings from the shops
situated at Adda Madhani Jut. It took us 45 minutes in recovery
proceedings. We were keeping weighing scale with us which is
available on the shops. I do not remember as to what types of
weights were used in weighing the above said narcotics. Thereafter
we all the police officials went to police station. We had not
entered our arrival in the daily diary register of Police station. It

7
 The State vs Najeebullah

took us 30/45 minutes at the police station in handing over

Najeebullah accused to the Moharrar of the police station. I do not
know if his arrest was incorporated in the Daily Diary register or
not. I do not know if the I.O had recorded statement of Moharrar
regarding handing over accused to him. I do not remember the
exact place of our patrolling after handing over Najeebullah
accused however, we remained on the Faisalabad, Jhang road. I do
not remember as to where we had gone after leaving the police
station. The currency notes are not available in the court today. I do
not know if the charas was in slabs or in pieces Pw volunteered
that it was in the shopper and I do not know its detail. Najeebullah
was not keeping with him the small shoppers, papers, cutting
instruments like knife etc or any kind of weighing scale with him. I
do not know wherefrom I.O had brought the weight for weighing
one grams specimen and of 10 grams specimen pw volunteered
that this question can be answered by the I.O . My name is
Muhammad Ejaz and not Ejaz Hussain. I do writing my name as
Muhammad Ejaz and not Ejaz Hussain at all. It is incorrect to
suggest that nothing was recovered from the accused. It is incorrect
to suggest that I have deposed falsely under the influence of my
senior.

R.O.&.A.C. Addl.Sessions Judge,

09.10.2015. Jhang.

8
 The State vs Najeebullah

The State. Vs. Najeebullah

Pw.2. STATEMENT OF Azhar Khan SI PRESENTLY

POSTED AT ICHARGE POLICE POST DOBBA PULL,
JHANG, ON OATH.

On 19.01.2015 I was posted at P.s Mochiwala as SI/as an

Acting SHO. On the same day at about 9 a.m, I was present
alongwith Ejaz Hussain , Imtiaz Hussain 1144-C, Azhar Hussain
776-C at Adda Gojra Mor, Jhang in connection with patrolling. I
received spy information regarding the presence of Najeebullah
accused who was present at Mudhani Jut. I reached at Adda
Madahni Jut, Najeeb Ullah tried to escape but I apprehended to
him. He was keeping a shopper in his hand which was checked by
us. The said shopper contained charas and heroin which was
weighed by us, charas was 1100 grams P.1 and heroin was 500
grams P.2. We also searched him and found a valet, a cell phone
and Rs.2000/- from his personal search.. I.O took into possession
one gram of specimen of heroin and 10 grams of charas made the
same into sealed parcel. I.O prepared parcels of specimen and case
properties, took the same into possession vide recovery memo
Ex.PA which was attested by Ejaz Hussain and Imtiaz Hussain. I
prepared a complaint Ex.PB which was through Azhar Hussain
776-C for onward transmission to the P.S for registration of the
case. I prepared un-scale site plan Ex.PC and recorded the

9
 The State vs Najeebullah

statements of Pws under section 161 Cr.PC. Recovery case property

was handed over to the Moharrar of P.S for keeping the same into
Malkhana for safe custody. On 20.01.2015 I got judicial remand of
the accused from Illaqa Magistrate and sent him to judicial lock up.
On 29.01.2015 I recorded the statement Pw Muhammad Masood
1314-C and Moharrar. I prepared the report under section 173
Cr.PC while placing the accused in column No.3.
X x x x x x x x Makhdum Majeed Hussain, Advocate learned
defence counsel.
We started patrolling early in the morning on that day.
I was also on patrolling at previous night. I was not present in the
area of Gojra Mor on the previous night. I patrolled in different
areas of the area. I remained on petrolling for about 2 and ½ hours
before receiving information. Pw volunteered we started patrolling
at about 6 a.m . I do not remember if I had entered my departure in
the daily diary register on that day or not. I also do not remember
that according to which rappat roznamch I had left the police
station for patrolling. I also do not remember as to how long ago I
had entered my departure in the daily diary register. Pw
volunteered it may be at 6 p.m. I did not annex the rappat
roznamcha with the file of this case. There are many shops at Adda
Madhani Jut. Najeeb Ullah accused was known to the police official
but he was not known to me prior to his arrest. All the employees
were sitting in the cabon of the Dala where I was sitting on front
seat of the Dala. Pw volunteered that Driver was sitting with me. I
do not remember the name of driver. The said driver is not the
witness of recovery memo. I had not recorded the statement of the
driver with respect of his acquaintance with Najeebullah accused. I
did not associate any private person in the recovery proceeding.
Pw volunteered I asked the private persons but they refused. It is
in my knowledge if some body denies to be a witnesses for any
offence on our request then his act falls within the ambit of an
offence. I did not proceed against the persons present there who
had denied to become a witness in this case. It is incorrect to
suggest that as the story of raid and recovery was a pack of lies,

10
 The State vs Najeebullah

therefore, none from the locality came forward to support my

version. The charas was in some pieces in hard form, again said in
many pieces. I did not count the number of pieces of charas, Pw
volunteered that there was numerous small pieces and some big
pieces. I myself had prepared the recovery memos, the complaint
and other proceedings (At this stage, learned defence counsel has
requested the court to provide a pencil and a paper to the witness
for comparison of his writing). Pw again said that usually I
prepared my case files in my hands but this case file is not in my
hand. As the witness has admitted that the case file of this case is
not in my hand writing, therefore, there is no need of comparison
and the defence counsel has with drawn his request. A road leads
to Chak No.215 towards its north from Adda Madhani Jut while a
road connects Chak No.216 with Madhani Jut from its southern
side. I had not mentioned the quantity of charas and heroin in the
rough site plan of place of recovery. I had also not mentioned
regarding separation of specimen in the rough site plan of place of
recovery. I had also not mentioned about the quantum of sale
amount in the rough site plan of place of recovery. I had no where
shown that where I was present at the time of recovery in the site
plan of place of recovery. I had not mentioned the names of the
witnesses in the rough site plan of place of recovery. I had not
mentioned that as to at what place I had firstly seen the accused. I
had also not mentioned that as to at what place to had weighed the
narcotics. It is incorrect to suggest that nothing was recovered
therefore, all these lapses occurred in the rough site plan of place of
recovery. It is further incorrect to suggest that rough site plan of
place of recovery was prepared while sitting at the police station by
the scribe who had prepared the file of this case. I myself went to
the police station alongwith the accused. I had already sent the
complaint to the police station through an employee and at that
time I had not sent the accused with him. After sending the
constable with the complaint to the police station I remained
present at the spot for 30/45 minutes. When the constable left for
the police station with the complaint, all the proceedings with

11
 The State vs Najeebullah

respect to raid, search, recoveries, their weights were completed.

My statement to this effect that case property was handed over to
the Mohrrar is not mentioned in the case diary. It is incorrect to
suggest that I made this statement to strengthen the prosecution
case. In the complaint the name of recovery witness is mentioned
as Ejaz Hussain and likewise in his name and his signature on the
recovery memo are mentioned as Ejaz Hussain. It is incorrect to
suggest that the name of head constable having paity No.1253 is
Muhammad Ejaz and not Ejaz Hussain. Pw volunteered that he
told me his name as Ejaz Hussain. It is incorrect to suggest that the
recovery memo were prepared by the scribe of the file in the
absence of Muhammad Ejaz Pw. It is incorrect to suggest that he
had never signed the recovery memo. At this stage, learned
defence counsel has requested for decealing the case property.
Learned ADPP objected that the report of PFSA is available on the
file which is positive in nature and the condition/shape of chars
can be changed with the weather condition, so there is no need for
decealing the case property. Objection kept alive and case property
of alleged chars is decealed and the same is found in hundred of
pieces. (The biggest piece available in the case property was to be
99 grams after weighing it). It is incorrect to suggest that the case
property before the court is not charas. It is also incorrect to
suggest that the alleged case property of heroin is not heroin.
When I produced Najeebullah accused before the learned
Magistrate he requested the court that I had not recorded his
version of innocence. Learned Illaqa Magistrate ordered me to
record the version of the accused. Najeeb Ullah accused got
recorded his statement that he was arrested from Lala Zar colony
and a false case has been registered against him because they had
lodged an FIR of murder case against a police officials and police
officials wanted to pressurize him for effecting a compromise with
the said police officials. I did not give any opinion regarding his
version. I am complainant of this case also I.O of this case. I did
not get my investigation verified from any of the high up of the
police including DSP/SDPO. On the day of raid upon the accused

12
 The State vs Najeebullah

the posting of Rana Khalid Raseed Inspector was at P.S Mochiwala.

Pw volunteered that he had gone to attend a course and was not
working as SHO. Before moving to attend his course he was
performing the duties of SHO at P.S Mochiwala. I do not know if
Rana Rustum a police officer is closely related to Rana Khalid
Rasheed. I do not know that if any murder case of close relative of
Najeebullah accused was registered again Rana Rustum Police
officer. I remained posted in District Jhang for 08/10 years. I do not
know if Rana Rustum was a proclaimed offender in the murder
case of Younis Blouch. It is incorrect to suggest that I have
purposely suppressed the above said facts under ulterior motive. I
do not know if Rana Khalid Rasheed SHO lodged FIRs against the
women folk closely related to Younis Blouch, the deceased of
murder case in which Rana Rustum was a P.O. It is incorrect to
suggest that I have purposely suppressed these facts to conceal our
enmity with Najeebullah accused. I do not know if case FIR
No.1436/2010 was lodged against Rana Rustum at P.S Saddar. I
also do not know that on the asking of Rana Khalid Rasheed
Inspector the then SHO, Rana Rustum moved pre arrest bail on
25.12.2014. I also do not know that all the cases registered against
the Pws of that case and the families of the Pws were registered
after 25.12.2014 to pressurize the legal heirs of the deceased to
make statements in favour of Rana Rustum before the court for
confirmation of his bail. I also do not know that none of the legal
heirs of the deceased Muhammad Younis, gave statement in
favour of Rana Rustum and his bail was dismissed on 26.01.2015
and he is still P.O in that case. I do not know if Najeebullah accused
is brother in law of Bismillah Khan Pw of murder case of Younis
deceased. I also do not know that sister in law of Najeeb ullah
accused is widow of above said Younis deceased. It is incorrect to
suggest that the present case was also registered against the
accused to pressurize him for compromise with Rana Rustum on
the behest of Rana Khalid Rasheed. On the day of raid, I was
keeping cell phone having No.03426027677. It is incorrect to
suggest that the location of my cell phon was found in the area of

13
 The State vs Najeebullah

Satellite Town, Jhang at the time of said raid. It is incorrect to

suggest that this is a false case against the accused and I have
deposed falsely.

R.O.&.A.C. Addl.Sessions Judge,

09.10.2015. Jhang.
The State. Vs. Najeeb Ullah,

Pw.4. STATEMENT OF Muhammad Masood Aziz/MHC

PRESENTLY POSTED AT Mochiwala, JHANG, ON
OATH.

On 10.01.2015 I was posted as Moharrar at Police Station

Mochiwala Jhang. On the same day, Azhar Khan SI handed over
to me two seal parcel said to contain charas and heroin for keeping
it for safe custody in malakhana and other two parcels for onward
transmission to the office of Chemical examiner, Lahore. On
28.01.2015 I handed over the said parcel to Talib Hussain 760-C for
its onward transmission to the office of Chemical Examienr,
Lahore. I.O also recorded my statement.

XXXXXXXX By Makhdum Majeed Hussain, advocate,

learned counsel for the accused.

I remained posted at P.S Saddar, Jhang as Naib

Moharrar. I do not remember if murder case of Younis Blouch was
registered against Rana Rustum Police officer. Rana Rustum is
known to me. Rana Rustum remained posted at different police
station as SHO, at Jhang. I do not know if Rana Rustum and SHO
Rana Khalid Rasheed are close relatives. It is incorrect to suggest
that I have suppressed this fact under ulterior motive. It is correct
that Rana Rustum is proclaimed offender in the murder case of
Younis Blouch. The murder case of Younis Bluch was registered
against Rana Rustum and other police officials prior to registration
of this case. My statement was not recorded on 19.01.2015 or on
20.01.2015. It is incorrect to suggest that parcels of specimens were
prepared while sitting at Police station on the direction of the then
SHO Rana Khalid Rasheed. It is incorrect to suggest that my
statement to this effect that I.O of this case handed over to me the

14
 The State vs Najeebullah

parcels and other case properties is false. It is incorrect to suggest

that I have deposed falsely.

R.O.&.A.C. Addl.Sessions Judge,

09.10.2015. Jhang.

15
 The State vs Najeebullah

The State. Vs. Najeebullah,

Pw.3. STATEMENT OF Ahmed Ali 1231-HC/DUTY OFFICER

PRESENTLY POSTED AT P.S Mochiwala, JHANG,
ON OATH.

On 19.01.2015 I was posted as Duty Officer at Police Station

Mochiwala Jhang. On the same day, I received a complaint EX.P.B.

sent by Azhar Khan S.I. through Azhar Hussain 776-c constable for

registration of case. On the basis of the complaint, I chalked out

formal FIR EX.P.D without any addition or omission on my part.

XXXXXXXX By Makhdum Majeed Hussain advocate, learned

counsel for the accused.

I do not know as according to which rappat the

I.O Azhar Khan had left the police station. I do not remember as to

at what time Azhar Khan SI had come to the police station. It is

incorrect to suggest that a fake complaint was prepared while

sitting at the police station and the FIR was lodged as advised by

Rana Khalid Rasheed Inspector.

R.O.&.A.C. Addl.Sessions Judge,

09.10.2015. Jhang.

16
 The State vs Najeebullah

The State. Vs. Shabaz Afghan,

Pw.2. STATEMENT OF MUZAMAL HAYAT SI PRESENTLY

POSTED AT INCHARGE P.P RUSTUM SARGANA, P.S
WARYAM WALA JHANG, ON OATH.

On 01.04.2015 I was posted at P.P Mighyana. On the same

day When I was present alongwith Muhammad Azam ASI,
Waseem Alam 563-C, Ghulm Murtaza and Altaf Hussain 421-C at
Tanga Adda, Jhang. I received spy information that Shabaz Afghan
accused now present in the court is present in a plot at the front of
his house and selling the charas and on this spy information I
alongwith above said witnesses reached in the front of the house of
Shabaz Afghun accused where accused was holding a shopper of
white colour in his right hand and on seeing the police party, the
accused try to slip away and he was chased and apprehended in
nearby street and from his right hand a shopper was recovered and
on its search charas P.1 weighing 1860 was recovered out of which
10 gram was separated for chemical analyses and parcel of said
charas as samaple was prepared. The said recovered charas was

17
 The State vs Najeebullah

secured through recovery memo Ex.PA which was attested by

Muhammad Azim ASI, Ghulam Murtaza pws, then I prepared a
complaint Ex.PB and sent the same through Waseem Alam 563-C
for the registration of the case. I also prepared an un scaled site
plan Ex.PC. I recorded the statements of the witnesses under
section 161 Cr.PC and accused was sent to police lock up on the
same day and on the next day, on the order of learned Judicial
Magistrate accused was sent to judicial lock up. I handed over the
case property and parcels to the Moharrar. On 02.04.2015 I
recorded the statements of the Moharrar and Mushtaq Ahmed
under section 161 Cr.PC.

XXXXXXXX By Mukhdoom Majeed Hussain advocate,

learned counsel for the accused.

I left P.P for patrolling on 01.04.2015 early in the morning. I

do not remember the time when I left the police post. I was already
in the area and had not entered my departure in the Daily diary
register. I do not remember the Rappat number according to which
I had left the P.P for the area. It is mandatory for a police officer to
record his departure and arrival while on official duty. I did not
annex the rappat of my departure with the file of this case to prove
my departure for patrolling on 01.04.2015 or earlier to 01.04.2015. I
did not incorporate the time in Ex.PB of receiving the information
at Tanga Adda. I had also not mentioned the time of my arrival at
Tanga Adda in complaint Ex.PB. Tanga Adda is a congested
populated Abadi. I had not entered any where about receiving the
spy information in respect of selling the narcotics by Shabaz
Afghun. I had not informed in writing to my high ups about
selling the charas by Shabaz volunteered I had telephonically
informed them. It is incorrect to suggest that volunteer portion of
my statement is incorrect. I had not mentioned any where about
informing the high ups through telephone. It is incorrect to suggest
that my answer regarding informing the high ups on telephone is
false and I have given the same under ulterior motive. We reached
at the place of recovery on one official vehicle, one private vehicle
and on some motor cycles. I was boarding in a private car and

18
 The State vs Najeebullah

some police officials were in official vehicle and some officials were
on motor cycles. The private car was of white colour. I have not
mentioned in Ex.PB that I was boarding in a private car whereas
some police officials were on official vehicle and some were on
motor cycles. I have not mentioned in Ex.PB that I alongwith
police officials had reached at the place of recovery on an official
vehicle. Confronted with Ex.PB wherein it is so recorded. I had
appeared before the Worthy Sessions Judge, jhang in a harasment
petition titled Shabaz Afghan Vs. SHO. In the above said
harassment petition no video was displayed in my presence in the
Sessions court. I do not remember if I had appeared before the
Worthy sessions Judge, Jhang in the above said harassment petition
on 21.04.2015. it is incorrect to suggest that I am deliberately and
dishonestly showing my ignorance regarding the said fact. It is
incorrect to suggest that video regarding arrest of Shabaz Afghun
accused in this case was played before the Worthy Sessions Judge,
Jhang in my presence on 21.04.2015. It is correct that two video
CDs are present in this time with the learned defence counsel. It is
incorrect to suggest that in the said video it transpires that Shabaz
Afghan accused was arrested by a person who was riding on a
motor cycle and he was forcibly put into a white car. It is incorrect
to suggest that I had made dishonest improvement to set up a
counter stance to avoid the consequences of above said video. At
this stage, learned defence counsel has requested the court to de-
seal the parcel of charas to ascertain that if Charas is in the shape of
pieces. Learned ADPP raised objection that the shape of the charas
can be changed with the weather condition and with the passage of
time. The request is allowed and the objection of learned ADPP
will be decided at the time of final judgment and parcel is ordered
to be de-sealed. It is observed that after deceased-sealing of parcel
that the alleged charas is in the shapes of hundreds of pieces. At
this stage I order for weighing the biggest piece available among
the hundreds of pieces of charas found in the the said parcel and
after weighing it was found that biggest piece having weight of 500
grams.

19
 The State vs Najeebullah

By learned defence counsel it is incorrect to suggest

that the alleged charas available in the parcel is not charas and that
is why it was not sent to the PFSA. The place of arrest of the
accused is a congested populated area. I did not join any person
from the locality in the recovery proceedings. Pw volunteered that
after seeing the police, every body living in that area fled away. It
is incorrect to suggest that I have made this volunteered statement
because none from the locality came forward to support my
version. I did not recover any knife, cutter, small packets, small
bags, weighing scale and weights from the accused. I did not
recover any sale amount ( ) from the accused. I did not
recover even a single penny from the possession of the accused. I
did not see any customer. I did not arrest any customer. I did not
interrogate during whole of the investigation regarding the
customer. After seeing us the accused did not throw the shopper.
We arrested him at some distance in the street. The accused was
arrested by Ghulam Murtaza constable and thereafter was reached
there. We remained present at the place of occurrence for half an
hour. In the said duration no one attracted to the place of
occurrence. I have not shown any place in the rough site plan
where I had weighed the charas. I have not shown in the rough site
plan, of recovery, the place where I had separated the sample from
the alleged charas. I had not written the name of the witnesses in
the rough site plan of place of recover. Pw volunteered that I
mentioned their names in the recovery memo. The recovery memo
is not in my hand writing. Pw volunteered that it was dictated by
me and some other police official written the same. I had not cited
him as a witness in this case. I had also not mentioned in any of
my proceedings that recovery memo was prepared by some other
person on my dictation. Complaint Ex.PB on the basis of which this
FIR was lodged was also written by some one else and not by me.
PW volunteered that it was drafted on my behalf. It is incorrect to
suggest that nothing was recovered from the accused and whole of
the case against him is based on malafide and my personal grudge
against the accused. Shabaz accused had filed a lot of petitions

20
 The State vs Najeebullah

against the police. The accused had filed one petition against me
and that was about harassment. It is incorrect to suggest that he
had also filed a petition for registration of case against me before
lodging the FIR. Harassment petition was pending adjudication
before the Worthy Sessions judge, Jhang when this case was
registered against the accused. An FIR of narcotic was lodged
against me when I was posted as Incharge P.P Murd Wala. Pw
volunteered that it was just a political victimization and it was
lodged due to mis conception. Pw further volunteered that I was
acquitted in that case. It is incorrect to suggest that my both
volunteered statements are false. FIR of narcotic was lodged
against me by the then DSP namely Rana Arshad. Pw again
volunteered that it was lodged against me on the asking of local
MPA. It is incorrect to suggest that my volunteer statement is false.
It is incorrect to suggest that I have deposed falsely.

R.O.&.A.C. Addl.Sessions Judge,

11.09.2015. Jhang.

21
 The State vs Najeebullah

The State. Vs. Shabaz Afghan,

Pw.1. STATEMENT OF MUSHTAQ AHMED 724-c PRESENTLY

POSTED AT POLICE LINE JHANG, ON OATH.

On 01.04.2015 I was posted at P.S Kotwali, Jhang on the same

day, Moharrar of the Plice station handed over to me a sealed

parcel said to contain charas for its onward transmission to the

office of PFSL. I deposited the same in the relevant office on

21.04.2015

XXXXXXXX By Mukhdoom Majeed Hussain advocate,

learned counsel for the accused.

It is incorrect to suggest that tampered parcel was

deposited in the said office.

R.O.&.A.C. Addl.Sessions Judge,

11.09.2015. Jhang.

22
The State vs Najeebullah

23
 The State vs Najeebullah

The State. Vs. Haroon, etc.

Pw.2. STATEMENT OF ABDUL LATIF 910/MHC, PRESENTLY

POSTED AT P.S. SADAR JHANG, ON OATH.

On 18.12.2012 I was posted as Moharir at Police Station

Sadar Jhang. On the same day, Liaqat Ali S.I. handed over to me

two sealed parcel, said to contain Heroin. On 01.01.2013, I

delivered one sealed parcel to Karamat Ali 326/C for onwards

transmission to the office of Forensic Science Agency, Lahore. I

deposited the other parcel in the Maalkhana. So far the said parcels

remained in my custody, no body tampered with it.

XXXXXXXX By Mr. Shafqat Abbas Khan Sial advocate,

learned counsel for the accused.

It is incorrect to suggest that neither any parcel had

been received to me nor I handed over any parcel to Karamat Ali. It

is incorrect to suggest that I have deposed falsely.

24
 The State vs Najeebullah

(Muhammad Aslam
Bhatti)
R.O.&.A.C. Addl.Sessions Judge,
07.10.2013. Jhang.

25