ASIF MEHMOOD vs THE STATE and another
This matter concerns a post-arrest bail application filed by the petitioner, who was charged under Section 9-C of the Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997, following the recovery of 'Post' and 'Bhang' from a premises where he was employed. The core legal questions were whether the recovered substances warranted the application of Section 9-C, and whether the petitioner was entitled to bail under the principle of further inquiry. The Court held that the quantitative analysis of the 'Post' suggested the offense, if any, fell under Section 9-B rather than 9-C. Furthermore, the Court determined that the classification of 'Bhang' under the Act remained a matter of further inquiry. Consequently, the Court admitted the petitioner to bail, establishing the principle that where the quantity of a narcotic substance is disputed or falls into a lower category of offense, and the classification of other recovered substances is debatable, the case warrants the grant of bail under Section 497(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898 as a matter of further inquiry.
- Whether the recovery of a substance in a quantity that may fall under a lesser section of the Control of Narcotic Substances Act 1997 entitles an accused to bail?
- Is the classification of 'Bhang' as a narcotic substance under the Control of Narcotic Substances Act 1997 a matter of further inquiry in bail proceedings?
- Does the potential for an offense to fall under a less severe provision of the Control of Narcotic Substances Act 1997 justify the grant of bail under Section 497(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898?
- Section 9-B, Control of Narcotic Substances Act 1997
- Section 9-C, Control of Narcotic Substances Act 1997
- Section 497(2), Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
ORDER
' Asif Mahmood petitioner seeks bail after arrest in case F.I.R. No,303 dated 8-12-2007 registered under section 9-C of C.N.S.A., 1997 at Police Station Abdul Hakeem, District Khanewal.
2. ' Briefly facts of the case are police raided on Qasimia Dawakhana, where petitioner was working and recovered 1-1/2 Kg. Post {{URDU TEXT}} and 19 Kg. Bhang from the Dawakhana alleging the recovery against the petitioner.
3.Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that quantitative percentage of narcotic substance in the "Post" comes to a meagre quantity and as such the case of the petitioner would fall within the area of section 9-B of Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997. He also submits that the case of the present petitioner is a border line case falling within the domain of section 497(2), Cr.P.C. And that the petitioner has not committed the offence under section 9-C of Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997 and he is entitled to the grant of bail.
4. Learned D.P.G. Has vehemently opposed this bail application on the ground that Bhang falls within the area of the Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997 and that it is a narcotic substance which is normally used for intoxication.
5. ' After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and perusing the record it has been concluded that quantity of narcotic substance in "Post" is always detected meager if quantitative test is done.
The case of the petitioner would definitely falls within the area of section 9-B Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997. The question as to whether the Bhang falls within the domain of Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997 or not is also matter of further inquiry. The circumstances does not exist to believe that offence committed falls within Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997.
6(sic). Resultantly, this petition is that allowed and the petitioner is admitted to bail subject to his furnishing bail bond in thesumaRs,20,000(Rupees two lacs. Only) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Illaqa/Duty Magistrate.