NAWAB KHAN vs THE STATE And Another
This is a criminal petition filed by Nawab Khan seeking post-arrest bail in case F.I.R No.458 dated 17-8-2010, registered under Section 9(c) of the Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997 at Police Station Saddar Kamoki, Gujranwala, involving the alleged recovery of 1050 grams of charas and sale money. The core legal question before the court was whether the petitioner was entitled to post-arrest bail given the quantity recovered and the circumstances of the case. The Lahore High Court held that the case 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 incarcerated since his arrest, and was no longer required for investigation, the petition should be allowed. The court laid down the principle that where the recovered narcotic quantity borders the limits of a lesser offense category, and the accused is a first-time offender whose further custodial interrogation is unnecessary, post-arrest bail may be granted.
- Whether an accused found in possession of a quantity bordering the upper limit of Section 9(b) of the Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997 is entitled to post-arrest bail?
- Does the prohibition contained in Section 497(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898 apply to every case under the Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997?
- Is previous non-conviction and lack of requirement for further investigation considered a ground for granting post-arrest bail in narcotic cases?
- Section 9(c), Control of Narcotic Substances Act 1997
- Section 497(1), Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
- Section 9(b), Control of Narcotic Substances Act 1997
ORDER By means of instant petition, Nawab Khan, petitioner has sought for his post arrest bail in case F.I.R No.458, dated 17-8-2010, offence under section 9(c) of the Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997 registered at Police Station Saddar Kamoki, Gujranwala.
2. Allegation against the petitioner, in brief, as per contents of the F.I.R., is that on 17-8-2010, he was apprehended and from his possession 1050 grams charas was recovered, besides sale money Rs.3000.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent, who has been involved in this case by the police just to show karvai to the highups. Learned counsel next argues that even otherwise case against the petitioner does not attract prohibition contained in section 497(1), Cr.P.C. Learned counsel further states that the petitioner, who is previous non-convict, has been 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.
5. We have given our anxious consideration to the arguments advanced at the bar. We have also gone through the record available on file, which 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, person of the petitioner is no more required by the police for the purpose of further investigation.
6. 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 sum of Rs.5,00,000 with two sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court.