WASEEM ABBAS vs THE STATE
This matter arises from a post-arrest bail petition filed by Waseem Abbas seeking release in case F.I.R. No. 724 registered at Police Station Tibbi City, District Lahore on 9-10-2005 under Articles 3 and 4 of the Prohibition (Enforcement of Hadd) Order, 1979. The core legal question considered by the court was whether the petitioner made out a case for further inquiry under Section 497(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898, given the lack of proof regarding the sale of narcotics and the absence of a Chemical Examiner's report confirming the recovered substance as Bhang. The Lahore High Court held that the absence of a chemical report and lack of proof for selling the substance, coupled with the maximum two-year sentence for mere possession under Article 4 and the petitioner's clean antecedents, brought the case within the scope of further inquiry. The court laid down the principle that where prosecution lacks immediate chemical verification and sale evidence for alleged narcotics, and the accused has no criminal record, continued incarceration serves no beneficial purpose and warrants the grant of post-arrest bail under section 497(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898.
- Whether absence of a Chemical Examiner's report regarding recovered substances justifies grant of post-arrest bail?
- Does a case fall within the scope of further inquiry under Section 497(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898 when there is no proof of sale under Article 3 of the Prohibition (Enforcement of Hadd) Order 1979?
- Is continued custody of an accused justified when the offense carries a maximum sentence of two years and investigation is complete?
- Article 3, Prohibition (Enforcement of Hadd) Order 1979
- Article 4, Prohibition (Enforcement of Hadd) Order 1979
- Section 497(2), Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
ORDER
' ASIF SAEED KHAN KHOSA, J.--- Through this petition Waseem Abbas petitioner has sought post- arrest bail in case F.I.R. No,724 registered at Police Station Tibbi City, District Lahore on 9-10-2005 in respect of offences under Articles 3/4 of the Prohibition (Enforcement of Hadd) Order, 1979.`"
2. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and going through the record it has been noticed by me that apparently no proof is available with the prosecution so far that the substance allegedly recovered from the petitioner's possession was being sold by the petitioner so as to attract the provisions of Article 3 of the Prohibition (Enforcement of Hadd) Order, 1979. As regards the offence of possession under Article 4 of the Prohibition (Enforcement of Hadd) Order, 1979 the same carries a maximum sentence of two years' imprisonment. The learned counsel for the State and the Police Officer present before the Court with record have confirmed the fact that so far no report has been received from the Chemical Examiner establishing that the substance allegedly recovered from the petitioner's possession was Bhang. After completion of the investigation a challan has already been submitted and, thus, continued custody of the petitioner in jail is not likely to serve any beneficial purpose at this stage. The Police Officer present before the Court has categorically stated that the petitioner has no credentials or antecedents of a dealer in narcotics as no other case of similar nature stands registered against him at the relevant police station.
3. For what has been discussed above the case against the petitioner calls for further inquiry into his guilt within the purview of subsection (2) of section 497, Cr.P.C. This petition is, therefore, allowed and the petitioner is admitted to bail subject to furnishing bail bond in the sum of Rs,30,000 (Rupees thirty thousand only) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court.