MOHSIN ABBAS vs THE STATE and another
This matter concerns a petition for post-arrest bail filed by the accused, who was charged under section 9(c)/15 of the Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997, following the alleged recovery of 1200 grams of charas. The petitioner contended that the recovery was planted due to previous enmity and that he had no prior criminal record. The State opposed the bail, citing the quantity of the narcotic substance and the applicability of the prohibitory clause under section 497 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898, and section 51 of the Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997. Upon review, the Court observed that the recovered quantity, exceeding one kilogram by only 200 grams, rendered the matter a borderline case. Considering the petitioner's lack of criminal antecedents and the fact that the challan had already been submitted, the Court held that further incarceration was unnecessary. Consequently, the Court admitted the petitioner to post-arrest bail, establishing the principle that in borderline narcotic cases, the absence of prior criminal history and the completion of the investigation may justify the grant of bail.
- Does the recovery of a narcotic substance slightly exceeding one kilogram constitute a borderline case for the purpose of bail?
- Can the absence of previous criminal antecedents be a ground for granting bail in a narcotics case?
- Is the submission of a challan a relevant factor in determining the necessity of further incarceration of an accused?
- Section 9(c), Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997
- Section 15, Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997
- Section 497, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
- Section 51, Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997
ORDER
The petitioner seeks post-arrest bail in case F.I.R. No.23, dated 3-5-2011, under section 9(c)/15 of the Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997 registered at Police Station ANF, Lahore.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that fake recovery has been planted upon the petitioner due to previous enmity as father of the petitioner had been murdered in year 1987; the petitioner is a police official, who planned to marry immediately after Eid-ul-Fitr and to frustrate his marriage plan, he has been involved in this case under a conspiracy; the petitioner does not have any previous criminal antecedents; a number of persons of the locality appeared in defence of the petitioner during investigation and stated that he had been summoned from his house and then hooked up in a false case.
3. Learned Deputy Prosecutor-General Punjab opposes grant of bail with the submission that huge quantity of charas weighing 1200 grams has been recovered from the possession of the petitioner; the offence, the petitioner is charged with, entails punishment falling within prohibitory clause of section 497, Cr.P.C. As well as that of section 51 of the Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997.
4. After having heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record, we find that the quantity of the recovered narcotic substance exceeds one kilogram by 200 grams, which makes the case of the petitioner, a borderline case. The petitioner is stated to be a previous non-convict.
He does not have any criminal antecedents. The challan has already been submitted before the trial Court on 28-6-2011 and his further incarceration is of no consequence to the prosecution case.
Therefore, we accept this application and admit the petitioner to post-arrest bail subject to furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs.1,00,000 (Rupees one lac) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial IA. Court.
Cited by 1 case
- MUHAMMAD RIZWAN vs THE STATE and anothers 2012 P Cr. L J 1449