NOOR KHAN vs THE STATE
This bail application arises from F.I.R. No. 321, registered under Section 9(c) of the Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997, at Police Station Toru (Mardan), following the arrest of the petitioner, Noor Khan, for the alleged possession of 3600 grams of charas. The core legal question before the Court was whether the petitioner was entitled to the concession of bail given the nature of the offense and the potential sentencing discretion available to the trial court. The Court observed that the petitioner had no prior criminal history or previous convictions. Furthermore, the Court noted that it remained uncertain whether the trial court would impose the maximum sentence prescribed by the statute or a lesser penalty, rendering the matter a borderline case. Consequently, the Court held that the benefit of this uncertainty should be extended to the accused. The petition was allowed, and the petitioner was admitted to bail subject to the furnishing of bail bonds, with the Court emphasizing the principle that in cases of potential sentencing discretion, the benefit of doubt regarding the severity of the ultimate punishment favors the accused at the pre-trial stage.
- Whether the absence of prior criminal history in a narcotics case constitutes grounds for granting bail?
- Does the uncertainty regarding the imposition of a maximum sentence under the Control of Narcotic Substances Act 1997 justify the grant of bail?
- Is a case involving the recovery of narcotics considered a borderline case for bail purposes when the potential sentence is discretionary?
- Section 9(c), Control of Narcotic Substances Act 1997
' DOST MUHAMMAD KHAN, CJ-Petitioner, Noor Khan, is seeking hail in case F.I.R. No,321 dated 1-6-2012 registered for crime under section 9(c) CNS Act by. Police Station Toru (Mardan) because on the fateful at 14-30 hours he was apprehended by Ibrahim Shah Khan. S.H.O. Police Station Toru when he was carrying in his trouser fold 3600 grams of chars.
' Arguments heard and record perused.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner produced judgment of this Court dated 1-8-2011 where bail was granted to the accused-petitioner charged for offence under section 9(c), CNS Act almost for similar quantity of narcotics.
3. The learned State Counsel conceded that there is no past criminal history of the petitioner as neither he was previously booked for such crime nor has been convicted.
4. The question arises is whether he. Would be awarded the maximum sentence provided in section 9(c) C.N.S. Act or the trial Court would opt for the lesser one, hence, it is a borderline case, the benefit of which shall go to the accused-petitioner.
' Accordingly, this petition for bail is allowed and the petitioner is directed to be released on bail provided he furnishes bail bond in the sum of rupees one lac (Rs,1.00,000) with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of Illaqa/Judicial Magistrate, who shall ensure that the sureties are local, reliable and men of means.
Cited by 4 cases
- Rahim Bakhsh vs The State 2021 MLD 553
- PATHAN KHOKHAR vs The STATE 2016 YLR 359
- ALI HASSAN alias HASAN vs The, STATE 2014 YLR 188
- GHULAM HUSSAIN vs The STATE 2014 YLR 874