MUHAMMAD ARFAN vs STATE and another
This matter arises from a post-arrest bail petition filed by the petitioner Muhammad Arfan seeking release in case FIR No. 228 registered under Section 9(c) of the Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997, following the alleged recovery of 1250 grams of Charas. The core legal question concerns whether further inquiry is warranted regarding the exact quantity of narcotics recovered and whether the case falls under Clause (b) or Clause (c) of Section 9 of the statute. The Lahore High Court held that since the recovered quantity is marginally higher than one thousand grams, the possibility of the police exaggerating the quantity cannot be ruled out, and that further inquiry is warranted. The court further noted the lack of previous criminal record and that pre-trial incarceration would not serve the cause of justice. Consequently, the petition was allowed and the petitioner admitted to bail. The key principle laid down is that where the recovered narcotic quantity is marginally above the threshold for a harsher clause, and tampering or exaggeration is plausible upon tentative assessment, further inquiry brings the case within the scope of further inquiry under Section 497(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898, justifying the grant of bail.
- Whether post-arrest bail can be granted when the recovered quantity of narcotics is marginally higher than the threshold for a harsher statutory clause?
- Does the possibility of police exaggeration of a recovered narcotic quantity constitute sufficient grounds for further inquiry under bail jurisprudence?
- Is pre-trial incarceration warranted when an accused has no previous criminal record and the trial has yet to commence?
- Section 9(c), Control of Narcotic Substances Act 1997
- Section 9, Control of Narcotic Substances Act 1997
- Section 173, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
ORDER
By filing this post arrest bail petition the petitioner Muhammad Arfan seeks his release on bail in case FIR No, 228 dated 06.06.2012, registered under Section 9(c) of Control of Narcotics Substances Act, 1997 with Police Station Neka Pura District Sialkot.
2. Precisely, the prosecution story as narrated in the FIR is that `Charas' weighing 1250 grams was recovered from the possession of the petitioner when he was apprehended by the raiding party.
3. After having heard the learned counsel for the parties and perusing the record, we have observed that 1250 grams of 'Charas' was recovered from the possession of the present petitioner at the time of his arrest. Only a meager quantity of narcotic substance i,e, 250 grams has brought the case of the present petitioner within the mischief of Section 9(c) of Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997 Possibility, therefore, cannot be ruled out that the police might have exceeded the quantity of recovered substance in order to bring the case of the present petitioner within the ambit of Section 9(c) of Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997. Even otherwise, the quantity of narcotic substance, alleged to have been recovered from the present petitioner, is marginally higher from one thousand grams, as such, it is a case between Clauses (b) and (c) of Section 9 of the Act, 1997. There are sufficient grounds to enquire further as to whether the case of the petitioner actually falls within the mischief of Section 9(c) of Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997. Report under Section 173, Cr.P.C. has been submitted in the Court of competent jurisdiction but no evidence has been recorded so far. Furthermore, the petitioner has no previous record and facing incarceration. Even otherwise the petitioner cannot be detained in jail as punishment before conclusion of the trial and detaining him in jail would not advance the cause of justice, therefore, we consider it a fit case for grant of bail to the petitioner.
4. In view of the, above, instant petition is allowed and the petitioner Muhammad Arfan is admitted to bail subject to his furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs,100,000/- (Rupees, One hundred thousand only) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court.