GUL REHMAN vs THE STATE through S. H.O.
This matter concerns a bail application filed by the accused-petitioner, Gul Rehman, seeking post-arrest bail in a narcotics case registered under the Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997. The petitioner was apprehended during a police raid on a residential house, where six kilograms of charas were allegedly recovered from his possession, while his co-accused managed to escape. The core legal question before the court was whether the petitioner was entitled to the concession of bail given the nature of the offence and the quantity of the contraband recovered. The court, upon reviewing the record, noted that the petitioner was directly charged in the First Information Report, the recovery was substantial, and the forensic report was positive. Furthermore, the court observed that the offence carried a potential sentence of life imprisonment, invoking the prohibitory clause of the law regarding bail. Consequently, the court held that there were reasonable grounds to believe the petitioner committed the offence and dismissed the bail application, emphasizing the gravity of the narcotics offence and the prima facie evidence available against the accused.
- Is an accused entitled to bail when charged with an offence under Section 9 of the Control of Narcotic Substances Act 1997 involving a large quantity of contraband?
- Does the recovery of a significant quantity of narcotics, punishable by life imprisonment, trigger the prohibitory clause under Section 497 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898?
- Can bail be granted where there is prima facie evidence of the accused's involvement and the co-accused remains at large?
- Section 9, Control of Narcotic Substances Act 1997
- Section 497, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
' MUHAMMAD ALAM KHAN, J.---The accused-petitioner seeks bail in case F.I.R. No, 799 dated 3-9- 2007 under section 9 of Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997 of Police Station Saddar Kohat.
2. Brief facts of the case, as narrated in F.I.R. No,799 are that Gul Jamal S.H.O. Police Station, Cantt: Kohat received a spy information that Noor Khan and Gul Rehman sons of Swab Khan resident of Zara Mala Illaqa Tribal Area of `Tirah' are involved is smuggling of contraband items. They bring it to Zara Mala and then are supplying the same to the people. A raiding party was arranged and residential house of Noor Khan and Gul Rehman was raided. Noor Khan decamped from the spot while Gul Rehman alongwith a small box containing six packets was arrested. On search of the packets it was found, after weighing that each packet contained 1000 grams of charas. The samples were taken and the same was sent to F.S.L. For chemical analysis. The report of the F.S.L. Is in positive.
3. The petitioner Gul Rehman submitted an application to Mr. Muhammad Zafar Khan, Additional Sessions Judge-IV, Kohat bearing bail application No,189 of 2007 who by order dated 21-9-2007 rejected the same, hence, the present application.
4. Mr. Muhammad Saeed Khan Shangla, Additional Advocate General for the State was heard in detail. He submitted that the petitioner besides being, directly charged in the F.I.R. Was arrested on the spot with six Kgs of contraband charas, which he used to sell to the people, was recovered from him. The complaints were regularly being received against the two brothers namely Gut Rehman and Noor Rehman the absconding co-accused that they are regularly selling the contraband to the people. There is strong evidence available on the record against the petitioner. The huge, quantity of 6(six) Kgs. Charas has been recovered and the punishment for the offence with which the petitioner is charged under section 9 CNSA carries sentence of life imprisonment, which is hit by the embargo as contained under section 497 Cr.P.C. Besides also the co-accused is still at large.
There are reasons to believe as per data available on the record that the accused has committed the offence prima facie, for which he has been charged.
5. In view of the facts and circumstances of the case narrated above, this petition fails which is hereby dismissed.
Cited by 2 cases
- NIAZBAT vs STATE PLJ 2008 Cr.C. (Peshawar) 1117
- NIAZBAT vs THE STATE 2008 MLD 1578