PLJ 2023 Cr.C. (Note) 53
Criminal Procedure Code, 1898 (V of 1898)--
----S. 497(2)--Control of Narcotic Substances Act, (XXV of 1997), S. 9(c)--Bail after arrest, grant of--Further inquiry--Allegation of--Recovery of charas--Petitioner maintains criminal history of two other cases of same nature but maintaining criminal history does not handicap to seek bail if case is otherwise fit on touchstone of further inquiry--Every accused is entitled to fair and speedy trial and nobody can be detained in jail by way of advance punishment--The petitioner is behind bars since his arrest and his continuous detention for indefinite period would be unfair, in particular, when there is doubt in recovery of contraband--The embargo contained in Section 5 of Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997 is also not attracted in this case--Bail allowed. [Para 3 & 4] A
PLD 2012 SC 380 and 2021 SCMR 63 ref.
Mr. Muhammad Ali Butt, Advocate for Petitioner.
Miss Asmat Parveen, Deputy District Public Prosecutor for State.
Date of hearing: 13.10.2022.
PLJ 2023 Cr.C. (Note) 53
[Lahore High Court, Multan Bench]
Present: Muhammad Amjad Rafiq, J.
MUHAMMAD JALAL--Petitioner
versus
STATE etc--Respondents
Crl. Misc. No. 6746-B of 2022, decided on 13.10.2022.
Order
Muhammad Jalal, petitioner has sought post-arrest bail in-case F.I.R. No. 264 dated 24.08.2022, under Section 9(c) of Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997, registered at Police Station Budhla Santt, District Multan.
2. Allegedly, 1300-grams charas was recovered from the petitioner.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that though allegation of having 1300-grams charas was levelled against the petitioner but as a matter of fact, alleged charas was in three pieces and police while separating the samples have taken a composite sample and it is not reflected from the contents of FIR that the weight of such pieces have been recorded by the police at the site and even composite sample is against the dicta of Hon’ble Supreme Court of Pakistan in case titled “Ameer Zeb versus The State ( PLD 2012 Supreme Court 380). Learned counsel for the petitioner further states that though petitioner maintains criminal history of two other cases of same nature but maintaining criminal history does not handicap to seek bail if case is otherwise fit on the touchstone of further inquiry. Every accused is entitled to fair and speedy trial and nobody can be detained in jail by way of advance punishment. The petitioner is behind the bars since his arrest and his continuous detention for indefinite period would be unfair, in particular, when there is doubt in recovery of contraband. The embargo contained in Section 51 of the Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997 is also not attracted in this case.
4. It is not the quantity but circumstances as reflected above make the case of the petitioner that of further inquiry into his guilt within the ambit of sub-section (2) of Section 497, Cr.P.C. The Hon’ble Supreme Court of Pakistan in the case reported as “Jahanzeb and others versus State through A.G. Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Peshawar and another” (2021 SCMR 63), with reference to Section 497(2) Cr.P.C., has held as under:
“Perusal of the aforesaid provision reveals the intent of the legislature disclosing pre-condition to establish the word “guilt” against whom accusation is levelled has to be established on the basis of reasonable ground, however, if there exists any possibility to have a second view of the material available on the record then the case advanced against whom allegation is levelled is entitled for the relief in the spirit of Section 497(2), Cr.P.C.”
5. Resultantly this petition is allowed and the petitioner is admitted to bail subject to furnishing bail bond in the sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of learned trial Court.
(A.A.K.) Bail allowed
0 Comments