ARSHAD vs STATE and another
The petitioner sought post-arrest bail in a criminal case registered under Section 9(c) of the Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997, relating to the alleged recovery of 1050 grams of charas. The core legal question was whether the recovery of contraband slightly exceeding the threshold for a lesser category, when weighed potentially including its packaging, warranted further inquiry under criminal jurisprudence. The Lahore High Court held that the ambiguity surrounding whether the narcotic was weighed with or without its wrapper created a favorable inference for the accused, making the exact weight a matter of further inquiry. Additionally, considering that the petitioner was a previous non-convict, incarcerated, and that the trial had not progressed despite the submission of the challan, the court allowed the petition and admitted the petitioner to post-arrest bail. The key principle laid down is that ambiguity in the weighing of narcotics with wrappers creates a reasonable doubt regarding the applicability of higher penal clauses, entitling the accused to further inquiry and bail.
- Whether ambiguity regarding whether a narcotic substance was weighed with or without its wrapper constitutes a ground for further inquiry entitling the accused to post-arrest bail?
- Does the recovery of 1050 grams of charas under Section 9(c) of the Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997 warrant bail when the exact weight is debatable?
- Is a previous non-convict entitled to post-arrest bail when the challan has been submitted but there is no progress in the trial?
- Section 9(c), Control of Narcotic Substances Act 1997
ORDER
Petitioner seeks post arrest-bail in a case arising out of FIR No, 524/2014 dated 09.10.2014 registered at the Police Station Noor Shah, Sahiwal under Section 9(c) of the Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997, wherein, the allegation against the petitioner is that on spy information when rah. was conducted, he was found possessing 1050-grams of charas with him.
2. We have heard the arguments of learned counsel for the parties and perused the available record.
3. It is case of the prosecution that on spy information when raid was conducted, the petitioner was apprehended and was found in possession of 1050-grams of charras, as such, a small quantity of contraband "charras" exceeded the prescribed upper limit of the quantity of the narcotic, as mentioned in Section 9(c) of the CNSA, 1997, which resulted in bringing the case of the present petitioner within the mischief of 9(c) of the Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997. In this case, there is nothing on the record to say that whether the narcotic, allegedly recovered from the petitioner, was weighed with its wrapper/shopper or it was separated from the wrapper/shopper and then weighed. In this view of the matter, when on this aspect nothing can be said with exactitude, an inference favorable to the petitioner can be drawn that the narcotic substance recovered from the petitioner was weighed with its wrapper/packet, therefore the question about exact weight of the recovered narcotic substance would require further inquiry, as such a little difference, prima facie, casts doubt on the prosecution story qua involvement of the present petitioner in a case covered under Section 9(c) of the Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997.
Additionally, the petitioner is previous non-convict, he is behind the bars and after completion of investigation the Challan has been submitted, but there is no progress in the trial. Consequently, this petition is allowed and petitioner is admitted to post arrest bail on furnishing bail bond in the sum of Rs, 100,000/ with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of learned trial Court.