MUHAMMAD ASHIQ vs THE STATE And Another
This is a criminal petition seeking post-arrest bail in a narcotics case registered under Section 9(c) of the Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997, involving the alleged recovery of 1015 grams of charas from the petitioner. The core legal question is whether the petitioner is entitled to post-arrest bail given the quantity of the narcotic substance recovered and the circumstances of the case. The Lahore High Court held that the case against the petitioner fell slightly on the higher side of the upper limit of Section 9(b) of the Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997, and considering that the petitioner was a previous non-convict, had been behind bars since his arrest, and was no longer required for further investigation, the petition should be allowed. The court laid down the principle that where the recovered quantity borders the limits of a lesser offense category under the statute and the accused meets criteria such as being a statutory non-convict and no longer needed for investigation, post-arrest bail may be granted.
- Is an accused entitled to post-arrest bail when the recovered quantity of narcotics falls near the upper limit of a lesser statutory category?
- Whether the absence of previous conviction and no further requirement for police investigation justify the grant of post-arrest bail in narcotics cases?
- Does the recovery of 1015 grams of charas warrant the denial of bail under Section 9(c) of the Control of Narcotic Substances Act 1997 in all circumstances?
- Section 9(c), Control of Narcotic Substances Act 1997
- Section 9(b), Control of Narcotic Substances Act 1997
ORDER Through the instant petition, Muhammad Ashiq petitioner has sought for his post-arrest bail in case F.I.R No.230, dated 21-4-2010, offence under section 9(c) of the Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997 registered at Police Station Cantt., Gujranwala.
2. Briefly the prosecution case as per the F.I.R. Is that on 21-4-2010, the petitioner was apprehended by the police and from his possession 1015 grams charas was recovered.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent, who has been roped in this case by the police with mala fide intention in order to show karvai to the high-ups and the recovery is planted one. Learned counsel next argued that there is no independent witness of the recovery. It is further contended that the petitioner is previous non-convict and behind the bars since the date of his arrest and no more required by the police for further investigation.
4. Learned D.P.-G., on the other hand, has opposed the petition with full force. It is argued that a huge quantity of contraband charas was recovered from the petitioner, therefore, he in no way is entitled to the concession of bail.
5. Arguments heard. Record available on file perused.
6. Bare perusal of the record available on file reveals that case against the petitioner is slightly on the higher side of upper limit of section 9(b) of the Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997. The petitioner is stated to be previous non-convict and behind the bars since the date of his arrest.
Moreover, he is no more required by the police for the purpose of further investigation.
7. In such circumstances of the case, we have been persuaded to allow this petition as a consequence whereof, the petitioner is admitted to bail after arrest subject to his furnishing bail bonds in the cum of Rs.1,00,000 with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court.