Pakistan Case Law
2019 SCMR 1651, PLJ 2019 SC (Cr.C.) 370

HUSSAIN ULLAH vs STATE and another

⭐ Prefer in Google
Citation2019 SCMR 1651, PLJ 2019 SC (Cr.C.) 370
CourtSupreme Court of Pakistan
Case No.Criminal Petition No, 989 of 2017
Date2017-09-22
Judge(s)Manzoor Ahmad Malik and Sardar Tariq Masood
Authored byManzoor Ahmad Malik
ResultPetition allowed
AI Summary — generated from this judgment; read the full text below and verify before relying on it.

This petition for post-arrest bail arose from a case registered under Section 9(c) of the Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997. The prosecution alleged that the petitioner, along with co-accused, was apprehended in a parked car from which packets of charas were recovered. The petitioner was sitting on the rear seat of the vehicle. The core legal question was whether the petitioner could be held to be in possession of the recovered narcotics when he was not driving the vehicle, no narcotics were recovered from his exclusive possession, and there was no evidence connecting him to the car. The Supreme Court of Pakistan held that under these circumstances, the petitioner's involvement was a matter of further inquiry under Section 497 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Consequently, the court converted the petition into an appeal, allowed it, and granted bail, establishing the principle that mere presence in a vehicle from which narcotics are recovered, without exclusive possession or a proven connection to the vehicle, warrants further inquiry for the purpose of bail.

Questions settled in this judgment
  • Whether a passenger sitting in the rear seat of a vehicle can be denied bail under Section 497 Cr.P.C. when no narcotics are recovered from their exclusive possession and there is no evidence connecting them to the vehicle?
  • Does the mere presence of an accused in a vehicle from which narcotics are recovered automatically establish possession to deny bail, or does it make the case one of further inquiry?
  • Can an accused be kept incarcerated indefinitely for further inquiry when nothing remains to be recovered from their possession?
Laws & provisions referred
  • Section 9(c) of the Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997
  • Section 497 Code of Criminal Procedure
post-arrest bailnarcotics recoveryfurther inquiryexclusive possessionControl of Narcotic Substances ActCode of Criminal Procedure

ORDER

Manzoor Ahmad Malik, J.-Through this petition, the petitioner impugns the order dated 17.8.2017 whereby bail was refused to him by the learned Lahore High Court in case. FIR No, 96 dated 16.03.2017, offence under Section 9(c) of the Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997, registered at Police Station Phularwan, District Sargodha.

2. The prosecution case, as per FIR, is that on the fateful day a police party , on a secret information, raided at Salam Bhalwal Road, Mian Muqeem Road More where a car was parked. On the driving side of the car co- accused of the petitioner namely Zahid Shah was present who was arrested. Zahid Shah disclosed that he had already handed over two packets of charas to Naeem Rashid who was also arrested and two kilograms of charas was recovered from his possession. The police also arrested Pervaiz Ahmed who was sitting on the front seat of the car and petitioner Hussain Ullah who was sitting on the rear seat of the car. On search of the car three more packets of chars weighing three kilograms were recovered.

3. After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner , learned Law Officer and perusal of available record, it has been observed by us that when the petitioner was arrested by the police, he was not driving the car nor any narcotic was recovered from his exclusiv e possession rather he was sitting on the rear seat of the car. Learned Law Officer has confirmed under instruc tions of the police officer present in Court that there is nothing on the record to connect the petitioner with the car. In these circumstances, the case of the petitioner becomes one of further inquiry falling within the ambit of Section 497 Code of Criminal Procedure. He is behind the bars since 16.3.2017 and nothing is to he recovered from him. In this backdrop, no useful purpose shall be served by keeping him incarcerated for an indefinite period.

4. For the foregoing, this petition is conve rted into an appeal and the same is allowed. Appellant-Hussain Ullah is admitted to bail (in the instant FIR) subject to his furnishing bail bond in the sum of Rs, 5,00,000/- (five lac only) with one surely in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court.

Cited by 11 cases

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