Ijaz Ahmad vs State and another
The petitioner, Ijaz Ahmad, sought post-arrest bail in case FIR No. 419 dated 11.08.2019 registered under Section 9(c) of the Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997 at Police Station Qadirpur Raan, District Multan, following the alleged recovery of 1120 grams of charas. The core legal question was whether the petitioner was entitled to post-arrest bail where the recovered contraband quantity marginally exceeded the threshold for a lesser offence and the chemical examiner's report was awaited, while the accused had already endured a statutory period of incarceration and investigation was complete. The Lahore High Court allowed the petition and admitted the petitioner to bail, holding that the marginal excess over the lower weight category, the lack of clarity regarding the exact weight of the shopper, the absence of the chemical examiner's report, and the fact that the petitioner was no longer required for investigation warranted the grant of bail. The key principle laid down is that where a recovered narcotic substance marginally exceeds the statutory threshold and trial conclusion is not imminent, such factors tilt in favour of granting post-arrest bail.
- Whether post-arrest bail can be granted when the recovered quantity of narcotics marginally exceeds the threshold of a lesser offence?
- Does the absence of a chemical examiner's report during pre-trial detention support the grant of bail in narcotics cases?
- Is an accused entitled to bail if investigation is complete and they are no longer required for further investigation?
- Section 9(c), Control of Narcotic Substances Act 1997
- Section 9(b), Control of Narcotic Substances Act 1997
ORDER
1. Ijaz Ahmad, petitioner has sought post arrest bail in case/FIR No. 419 dated 11.08.2019, registered at Police Station Qadirpur Raan, District Multan, for an offence under Section 9(c) of the Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997.
2. Precisely the allegation against the petitioner is that he was apprehended on suspicion and charas weighing 1120 grams was recovered from his possession.
3. Arguments heard. Record perused.
4. Allegedly, the charas weighing 1120 grams from the shopper, which the petitioner carried in his right hand, was recovered, which as per prosecution's version, is marginally above the upper limit of Section 9(b) of the Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997 but there is nothing on record to suggest that the contraband material recovered from the petitioner was put on the scale with or without shopper and removal thereof might have reduced its actual weight. The report of Chemical Examiner has not been received so far. The investigation of this case has already been completed. The petitioner is behind the bars since his arrest and is no more required for further investigation. In an identical case reported as "Saeed Ahmad vs. State through P.G Punjab and another" (PLJ 2018 SC 812), the apex Court has observed as under: "The record reveals that the petitioner has been found in possession of 1350 grams of charas. Since the substance recovered marginally exceeds 1 k.g. we doubt petitioner could be awarded maximum sentence provided by the statute. The fact that he has been in jail for more than seven months and his trial is not likely to be concluded in the near future would also tilt in favour of grant of bail rather than refusal."
5. In view of above, the petition in hand is allowed and the petitioner is admitted to bail subject to his furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs. 100,000/-(rupees one lac) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of learned trial Court.