SHAHID vs The STATE
This is a criminal petition filed by the accused-petitioner Shahid seeking post-arrest bail after being refused by the lower court in a case registered under Section 9(c) of the Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997, regarding the alleged recovery of 4000 grams of charas. The core legal question was whether the petitioner was entitled to the concession of bail considering the quantity of contraband recovered and the quantum of sentence likely to be imposed. The Peshawar High Court accepted the bail application and held that since the quantity recovered did not necessarily warrant the maximum punishment under Section 9(c), and considering that the investigation was complete, the accused was not a previous convict, and his further incarceration would serve no useful purpose, he was entitled to bail. The key principle laid down is that for the purpose of bail in narcotics cases, the quantity of contraband recovered and the expected quantum of punishment are vital factors to be considered, and lesser recovery within a prohibitory clause may justify the grant of bail.
- Whether post-arrest bail can be granted under Section 9(c) of the Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997, when the recovered quantity of contraband does not attract the maximum punishment?
- Does the completion of investigation and the non-previous conviction status of an accused justify the grant of bail in narcotics cases?
- Section 9(c), Control of Narcotic Substances Act 1997
' SHAH JEHAN KHAN AKHUNDZADA, J.---Having been involved in a case registered at Police Station, Badhaber Peshawar vide F.I.R. No, 257 dated 22-3-2013 under section 9(c) Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997, the accused-petitioner Shahid was refused bail by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-VII/JSC, Peshawar by his order dated 2-4-2013. Now he has come to this Court for his release on bail.
2. As per contents of the murasila, on 22-3-2013 at 1430 hours Khushdil Khan S.-I. Along with police contingents while on gasht of the Illaqa was present at thoroughfare "Tor Kanri" meanwhile a person having a cloth bag on his shoulder mark with "Markata-al-Zaitoon" came from Bara side and was apprehended and on search he recovered contraband charas weighing 4000 grams, out of which 5/5 grams were separated for analysis through FSL and the remaining was sealed into separate parcel. The person arrested disclosed his name as Shahid son of Sarfaraz, who was arrested on the spot and a case under the above section of law was registered against him.
3. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, I have come to the conclusion that it is consistent view of this Court that for the purpose of bail in such like offences the quantity of contraband and the expected quantity of punishment which is to be awarded at the conclusion of trial is to be taken into account while allowing bail to the accused persons. Thus, keeping in view the quantity allegedly recovered from the possession of the accused-petitioner, there is no possibility of awarding maximum punishment provided under sub-clause (c) of section 9 CNSA. So, in such like circumstances, the superior judiciary and even the apex Court have been pleased to grant bail to the accused involved in such like cases. Reliance in this regard can well be placed upon the judgment reported as 2009 SCM R 954 (Muhammad Ullah v. The State). Moreover, the investigation against the accused-petitioner is complete and he is A no more required to the Investigating Agency for any further investigation. He is also neither a previous convict nor involved in such like offences so keeping him behind the bars will serve no useful purpose to the prosecution.
4. In view of the above, this bail application is accepted and the accused-petitioner is admitted to bail provided he furnishes bail bond in the sum of Rs,100,000 (rupees one lac) with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of Illaqa/Duty Magistrate, who shall ensure that the sureties must be local, reliable and men of means.
5. The above are the reasons of my short order announced on 6-5-2013.
Cited by 4 cases
- Hamdullah vs The State 2022 MLD 998
- RUSTAM ALI Versus State 2017 YLRN 417
- SABAR SHAH Versus State 2017 PCrLJN 99
- SHAH NAWAZ alias SHANOO vs The STATE 2014 P Cr. L J 482