DILA BAZ KHAN vs THE STATE
This is a post-arrest bail application filed by the petitioner Dila Baz Khan seeking release in case F.I.R. No. 33 registered under section 9 of the Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997 at Police Station Saddar Bannu, wherein he was allegedly apprehended with 1675 grams of Charas. The core legal question was whether the petitioner was entitled to the concession of bail given the facts and circumstances of the case. The Peshawar High Court held that the case fell within the ambit of further inquiry under subsection (2) of section 497 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898, noting that the recovered quantity marginally exceeded the threshold, making it a borderline case between clauses (b) and (c) where maximum punishment may not be attracted, coupled with the absence of independent witnesses, delayed forensic report, and lack of a cited purchaser. The court laid down the principle that marginal excess in narcotic quantity making a case borderline, alongside evidentiary gaps like lack of independent corroboration, can constitute grounds for further inquiry warranting post-arrest bail.
- Whether a borderline recovery quantity marginally exceeding the threshold between different clauses of section 9 of the Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997 constitutes grounds for further inquiry under section 497 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898?
- Does the absence of independent witnesses to the recovery of narcotics entitle an accused person to post-arrest bail?
- Whether a delayed forensic science laboratory report can be considered a ground for granting bail in narcotic cases?
- Section 9, Control of Narcotic Substances Act 1997
- Section 497, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
' MUHAMMAD ALAM KHAN, J.---This is an application for bail moved by Dila Baz Khan son of Balqiaz Khan, resident of Haji Khel Anwar Shah, Tehsil and District Bannu in case F.I.R. No,33 dated 24-1-2008 under section 9 C.N.S.A. Registered at Police Station Saddar Bannu. He has failed to secure bail from the Court of learned Additional Sessions Ridge-III Bannu.
2. The prosecution story as gleaned from the F.I.R. Lodged through a written Murasila at the behest of Iftikhar Ali Shah, S.H.O. Of Police Station Saddar Bannu, is that a person by the name of Dilabaz was reportedly indulged in the business of narcotics. Farmanullah D.F.C. Was thus deputed for his tracing out who informed Asif Mehmood A.S.-I. On Mobile phone who was on routine Gusht about the task assigned to him that a person was busy in selling Charas. Thereafter, Asif Mehmood A.S.-I.
Along with police party rushed to the spot and Farmanullah D.F.C. Signaled towards a person to be the narcotics dealer. On seeing the police party, the said person tried to flee away from the spot but he was overpowered by the police having a plastic bag of black colour in his hands. On checking it contained numerous Purries of Charas weighing 1675 grams and 22 number currency notes of Rs,10 each denomination. The accused on interrogation disclosed his name as Dilabaz son of Balqiaz. He was thus arrested and case F.I.R. Mentioned above was registered against him. He applied for bail to the learned lower Court but could not succeed and hence this petition.
3. Written arguments were furnished on behalf of the petitioner which were perused and placed on file. The learned Deputy Advocate-General opposed the grant of bail to the petitioner orally. Record of the case was perused.
4 It is yet to the proved at trial whether the case of the accused/petitioner, from the facts and circumstances of the case brought on record, falls under section 9(b) or 9(c), C.N.S.A. As the quantity of the allegedly recovered Charas marginally exceeds and the case is of border line one between Clause 'B' and 'C' of section 9 C.N.S.A. Where maximum punishment cannot be awarded even if the charge is established; there is no independent witness to the recovery, the report of F.S.L.
Is a delayed one and no one as purchaser has been cited or examined by the prosecution in support of its case, are the grounds which bring the case of the accused/petitioner within the ambit of further inquiry entitling him to the concession of bail.
5. Resultantly, this application is accepted and the accused/petitioner is allowed bail in the sum of Rs, one lac with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of Illaqa/Judicial Magistrate Bannu, who shall see that the sureties are local, reliable and men of means.
Above are the reasons for my short order of even date.
Cited by 6 cases
- Barkat ullah Versus State 2025 PCrLJ 994
- Barkat Ullah vs The State & another 2024 IHC 250, 2025 PCRLJ 994
- MUHAMMAD SHAFIQUE vs The STATE 2016 P Cr. L J 1315
- YOUSIF KHAN vs THE STATE 2011 YLR 329
- PERVAIZ KHAN vs THE STATE 2010 YLR 2005
- ALI AKBAR vs THE STATE 2010 YLR 127