Pakistan Case Law
K.L.R. 2014 Criminal Cases 34

Shahid Khurshid vs The State, etc.

⭐ Prefer in Google
CitationK.L.R. 2014 Criminal Cases 34
CourtLahore High Court
Case No.Crl. Misc. No,. 9929-B of 2013
Date2013-08-05
Judge(s)Ali Baqar Najafi, Abdul Sami Khan
ResultBail after arrest granted
AI Summary — generated from this judgment; read the full text below and verify before relying on it.

This petition for post-arrest bail arises from FIR No. 253 of 2013, registered under Section 9(b) of the Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997, and Articles 3 and 4 of the Prohibition (Enforcement of Hadd) Order-IV of 1979. The petitioner was apprehended with 450 grams of charas, 55 bottles of liquor, and cash proceeds. The core legal question was whether the petitioner was entitled to the concession of bail given the nature of the alleged offenses and the statutory provisions involved. The petitioner argued false implication and that the offense under Section 9(b) of the Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997, does not fall within the prohibitory clause of Section 497 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898. The Court held that since the offenses charged do not fall within the prohibitory clause of Section 497 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898, nor attract the prohibition under Section 51 of the Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997, the petitioner was entitled to bail. Consequently, the Court granted post-arrest bail, subject to the furnishing of bail bonds.

Questions settled in this judgment
  • Does an offense under Section 9(b) of the Control of Narcotic Substances Act 1997 fall within the prohibitory clause of Section 497 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898?
  • Does an offense under Articles 3 and 4 of the Prohibition (Enforcement of Hadd) Order-IV 1979 fall within the prohibitory clause of Section 497 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898?
  • Is a petitioner entitled to bail if the offense charged does not fall within the prohibitory clause of Section 497 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898?
Laws & provisions referred
  • Section 9(b), Control of Narcotic Substances Act 1997
  • Article 3, Prohibition (Enforcement of Hadd) Order-IV 1979
  • Article 4, Prohibition (Enforcement of Hadd) Order-IV 1979
  • Section 497, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
  • Section 51, Control of Narcotic Substances Act 1997
post-arrest bailnarcoticsprohibitory clauserecoverycriminal procedurebail bond

ORDER

' ALI BAQAR NAJAFI, J. --- The petitioner seeks post arrest bail in case FIR No,. 253 of 2013 registered under section 9(b) of the Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997 and Articles 3/4 of the Prohibition (Enforcement of Hadd) Order-IV of 1979 at Police Station, Saddar Gurjat.

2. Allegations in brief contained in the Crime Report lodged by Tallat Abbas, S.I. Police Station Saddar Gujrat are that on 17.06.2013 the present petitioner was apprehended due to suspicion and on his personal search charas weighing 450 grams and liquor 55 Kupian alongwith sale-proceed Rs, 5070/- which he kept in his possession, were recovered. v

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that the petitioner has been falsely involved in the present case; that no such occurrence as alleged in the FIR has taken place and the fake recovery is planted upon the petitioner; the case against the petitioner falls within the ambit of section 9(b) of the Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997, which does not fall within the prohibitory clause. Further maintained that the petitioner is behind the bars since the date of his arrest and is no more required for the purpose of investigation.

4. On the other hand, learned Deputy Prosecutor General while opposing the bail petition maintained that the petitioner is nominated in the FIR and no malice or bias has been attributed either to the complainant or the Investigation Officer who was found in possession of 450 grams charas and 55 Kupian liquor along with wattak amount of Rs, 5070/-and as such is not entitled to the concession of bail.

' However, it was admitted that the petitioner got no previous record.

5. Since section 9(b) of CNSA, 1997 and Articles 3/4 of the Prohibition (Enforcement of Hadd) Order- IV of 1979 do not fall within prohibitory clause of section 497, Cr.P.C. And does not attract the prohibition contained in section 51 of the Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997 and as such, while allowing the petition, the petitioner is admitted to bail subject to his furnishing bail bond in the sum of Rs, 1,00,000/- with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Trial Court.

Bail after arrest granted.

For educational and research use only — not legal advice. Verify against the official report before relying on it. See our Disclaimer.