SAFDAR vs THE STATE
The petitioner sought post-arrest bail in case F.I.R. No. 34 dated 11-4-2009 registered under Section 9(c)/15 of the Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997 and Section 13 of the Pakistan Arms Ordinance, 1965 at Police Station ANF, Lahore. The core legal question was whether the petitioner, from whose direct custody no narcotics were recovered and who claimed to be a mere passenger having taken a lift in the vehicle, was entitled to bail. The court held that since no Charas was recovered from the direct custody of the petitioner and his knowledge regarding the presence of narcotics in the car required determination after recording evidence, his case fell within the scope of further inquiry. Consequently, the court allowed the petition and granted post-arrest bail to the petitioner. The key principle laid down is that the mere presence of an accused in a vehicle carrying narcotics, absent direct recovery or immediate proof of guilty knowledge, constitutes a case of further inquiry warranting the grant of bail.
- Whether an accused from whose direct custody no narcotics are recovered is entitled to bail when apprehended in a vehicle carrying contraband?
- Does the mere presence of an accused in a vehicle carrying narcotics establish his guilty knowledge without recording evidence?
- When does a narcotics case qualify as one of further inquiry for the purpose of granting bail?
- Section 9(c), Control of Narcotic Substances Act 1997
- Section 15, Control of Narcotic Substances Act 1997
- Section 13, Pakistan Arms Ordinance 1965
ORDER
' The petitioner seeks bail in case F.I.R. No,34 dated 11-4-2009 registered under section 9(c)/15 of the C.N.S.A. 1997 and section 13 of the Pakistan Arms Ordinance, 1965 at Police Station ANF, Lahore.
2. According to prosecution story, on interception of Suzuki Car LEF-07-5297 petitioner and his co- accused were found in that car which was being driven by Tariq Mehmood from whom five packets containing Charas weighing 5 Kgs were recovered. Muhammad Safdar son of Muhammad Aslam was sitting on the front seat and was keeping a shopper in his lap from which three packets containing Charas weighing 3 Kgs. Were recovered. On the rear seat Safdar son of Muhammad Ilyas (petitioner) was sitting. On further search, Charas weighing 2 Kgs, was recovered from the dickey of the car. 30-bore pistol was also recovered from Tariq Mehmood of which he could not produce licence.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that petitioner was not even acquainted with the remaining accused. He had obtained lift in the car and was implicated in this case merely because of his presence there, hence, he was entitled to bail.
4. The petition was opposed by the learned Senior Special Prosecutor for Anti Narcotic Force.
5. Admittedly no Charas was recovered from the direct custody of the petitioner. Whether he had knowledge of presence of narcotic in the car or he shared knowledge with his co-accused that they were carrying narcotic with them is a question which shall be determined after recording of evidence. Except presence of the petitioner in the car, no other circumstance has come on the record indicating his A connection with the offence or even the car. All these facts make this case as one of further inquiry. The petitioner, therefore, is allowed bail in the sum of Rs,50,000 with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of learned trial Court.