Summary: Acquittal ---- (a) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) ----Ss. 419, 421, 422 & 423---Criminal appeal---Scope and duty of appellate court---Even where conviction not expressly challenged and prayer confined to reduction of sentence, appellate court under S.423 is duty-bound to independently peruse entire record and adjudicate appeal on merits---Appellate jurisdiction not a mechanical exercise dependent upon concessions or strategy of counsel---Liberty of citizen cannot be compromised on account of omission or concession by defence counsel---High Court required to satisfy itself regarding legality of conviction notwithstanding limited prayer---Principle reaffirmed. (b) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) ----S. 423---Powers of appellate court---Phrase “after perusing such record”---Mandatory judicial obligation---Appellate court must apply independent judicial mind to evidence and law---Failure to examine record renders appellate adjudication legally vulnerable---Administration of criminal justice cannot hinge upon tactical choices of parties---Principle reiterated. (c) Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997 ----S. 9(c)---Standard of proof---Stringent penal statute---Prosecution required to prove charge beyond shadow of doubt---Evidence must be confidence-inspiring, consistent and free from material discrepancies---Courts below failed to appreciate evidence in proper legal perspective---Conviction recorded on infirm and unreliable evidence held unsustainable. (d) Criminal trial ----Recovery of narcotics---Material contradiction in weight of recovered contraband---Prosecution alleged recovery of twelve packets each weighing 1200 grams totalling 12 kilograms---On de-sealing and weighing before court, total weight found significantly lesser---Individual packet weights inconsistent with prosecution version---Discrepancy struck at root of prosecution case---Benefit of doubt accrued to accused. (e) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) ----Roznamcha entries---Safe custody of case property---Moharrir admitted no roznamcha entry regarding receipt of narcotics---Roznamcha entry failed to mention recovered charas---Chain of custody not established---Procedural lapse materially affecting prosecution case. (f) Evidence appreciation ----Contradictions---Colour and description of recovered substance---Witness described substance as brown whereas produced material was black---Seizing officer failed to describe nature and appearance of narcotics in FIR and recovery memo---Inconsistencies created serious doubt regarding genuineness of recovery. (g) Criminal trial ----Failure to collect best available evidence---CCTV footage---Accused alleged false implication and unlawful detention---Installation of CCTV cameras at police station admitted---Investigating Officer failed to secure or produce footage---Withholding of best evidence attracted adverse inference against prosecution. (h) Criminal jurisprudence ----Benefit of doubt---Even single circumstance creating reasonable doubt sufficient for acquittal---Prosecution case riddled with contradictions, discrepancies and procedural lapses---Courts below erred in sustaining conviction---Accused entitled to benefit of doubt as of right and not as concession. Cited cases: • Murad Baloch alias Michel v. State 2011 SCMR 1417 • Shahab Khan v. State 1997 SCMR 871 • Farrukh Sayyar v. Chairman NAB and others 2004 SCMR 01 Disposition: Criminal petition converted into appeal; appeal allowed; conviction and sentence under section 9(c) of the Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997 set aside; petitioner acquitted of the charge.