Mst. PARVEEN BIBI vs STATE
The petitioner, Mst. Parveen Bibi, sought post-arrest bail in a narcotics case registered under Section 9(C) of the Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997, following the recovery of three kilograms of charas. The core legal question was whether the petitioner, a woman charged with a non-bailable narcotics offence, was entitled to the concession of bail under the provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898. The Peshawar High Court held that while the offence is non-bailable under Section 51 of the Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997, the petitioner’s status as a woman brings her case within the ambit of the first proviso to Section 497(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898. Furthermore, the court reasoned that the quantity of narcotics recovered suggested that the maximum sentence was unlikely to be imposed, and noted the absence of any prior criminal record. Consequently, the court granted bail, establishing the principle that the gender-based proviso in Section 497(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898, provides a strong ground for bail consideration even in non-bailable narcotics cases, provided other factors like the quantity recovered and lack of criminal history support such relief.
- Does the first proviso to Section 497(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898 apply to women accused of non-bailable narcotics offences?
- Is the quantity of narcotics recovered a relevant factor in determining the likelihood of maximum punishment for bail purposes?
- Can a woman accused of a narcotics offence be granted bail despite the offence being non-bailable under the Control of Narcotic Substances Act 1997?
- Section 9(C), Control of Narcotic Substances Act 1997
- Section 51, Control of Narcotic Substances Act 1997
- Section 497(1), Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
Petitioner Mst. Parveen Bibi facing prosecution in case FIR No, 622 dated 28.11.2012 registered under Section 9 (C) Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997 at Police Station University Town, Peshawar, was refused bail by the Courts below, hence instant petition for her release on bail hence, she has filed the instant petition for her release on bail.
2. Allegation against the petitioner is that on 28.11.2012, the local police of P.S. University Town, Peshawar arrested her while coming an foot from Jamrud Karkhano Market having black shopping bag in her hand. On search, three packets of charas pukhta each weighing 1 Kg (total three kilograms) were recovered from her possession, hence the case vide FIR mentioned in the first paragraph was registered against him in Police Station University Town, Peshawar.
3. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, learned State counsel and have perused the available record.
4. No doubt, the offence is not bailable under Section 51 of the CNSA and falls within the ambit of sub-section (1) of Section 497, Cr.P.C. However, the accused-petitioner is a woman and thus her case falls within the first proviso of sub-section (1) of Section 497, Cr.P.C. which makes her case arguable for the purposes of bail. Moreover, keeping in view the quantity allegedly recovered from the petitioner, she is not likely to get maximum punishment because the quantum of sentence has to commensurate with the quantum of narcotics, if case against her is proved at trial. There is nothing on record to show that the petitioner is a previous convict or involved in such like offences.
5. In view of the above discussion, the petitioner is entitled to the concession of bail. Hence, the petition in hand is allowed and accused-petitioner is directed to be released on bail provided she furnishes bail bond in the sum of Rs,1,00,000/- (rupees one lac) with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of Illaqa/Duty/ Judicial Magistrate. The sureties shall be reliable and men of means.
6. Above are the reasons of my short order announced on 1.1.2013.