Mst. PARVEEN BIBI vs The STATE
This matter concerns a post-arrest bail application filed by a female petitioner charged 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, was entitled to the concession of bail despite the offense being non-bailable under the relevant statute. The Court held that while the offense falls within the prohibitory clause of Section 497 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898, the petitioner's status as a woman brings her case within the ambit of the first proviso to subsection (1) of Section 497, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898, making her case arguable for bail. Furthermore, the Court reasoned that the recovered quantity was not sufficient to warrant the maximum punishment, and there was no evidence of prior convictions. Consequently, the Court granted bail, establishing the principle that the gender-based proviso in the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898 provides a significant ground for bail consideration even in narcotics cases where the offense is otherwise non-bailable.
- Does the first proviso to Section 497(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898 apply to female accused persons charged under the Control of Narcotic Substances Act 1997?
- Is a female accused entitled to bail in a narcotics case if the recovered quantity does not warrant the maximum punishment?
- Does the lack of a criminal record influence the grant of bail for an offense falling under the prohibitory clause of Section 497, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898?
- Section 9(c), Control of Narcotic Substances Act 1997
- Section 51, Control of Narcotic Substances Act 1997
- Section 497, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
' SHAH JEHAN KHAN AKHUNDZADA, J.---Petitioner Mst.Parveen Bibi facing prosecution in case F. I . R.
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 Police Station University Town, Peshawar arrested her while coming on 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 F.I.R. 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 C.N.S.A. And falls within the ambit of subsection (1) of section 497, Cr.P.C. However, the accused-petitioner is a woman and thus her case falls within the first proviso of subsection (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 B 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 relied and men of means.
6. Above are the reasons of my short order announced on 1-1-2013.