PESHAWAR: A local court has acquitted a man arrested around two years ago over the alleged narcotics production in Hayatabad Township here.

After the completion of trial, the additional sessions judge declared that the prosecution failed to prove its case against the accused, Nazir Akbar, and that the evidence on record didn’t connect him with the commission of the offence.

The prosecution had claimed that in a joint operation, the Narcotics Eradication Team and local police arrested the accused after unearthing a narcotics manufacturing unit in a house in the jurisdiction of Tatara police station in Dec 2022.

It added that the raiding team seized 14kg heroin, 3kg crystal meth, 13kg chemical substance, and drug making tools.

Advocate Malik Mushtaq Ahmad appeared for the accused and contended that the prosecution’s case against his client was full of contradictions and that the Narcotics Eradication Team and police didn’t follow the necessary provisions of law in the raid on his house.

He also said that no private witness had been associated with the raiding team.

The lawyer said the law declared that whenever a dwelling place was raided, private persons should be there as witnesses.

He argued that while the police had mentioned the name of a female constable that she was also present in the raiding team, she had not been produced as a witness to prove that claim. “Without a female constable, a private residence can’t be raided,” he said.

Mr Malik argued that under the law, the initial complaint (marasla) had to be prepared at the spot before the registration of the FIR, but in the case in question, that marasla was also dubious as it was a computerised one.

He wondered whether the raiding team carried a computer and a printer during the raid.

The lawyer contended that the marasla had to be prepared by the complaint, who in the case was an officer of the NET, but in his cross-examination, he admitted that he couldn’t prepare a document in Urdu on the computer, proving that he had not prepared that initial complaint.

He also pointed out that the investigation officer had given contradictory statements, as his arrival at the house occurred well before the incident took place, raising significant doubts about the entire case.

A state prosecution argued that the accused was arrested with drugs from his house and there was no doubt about his involvement in the offence.

Published in Dawn, August 30th, 2024