Nazar Muhammad vs The State
This is a criminal miscellaneous petition filed by the petitioner, Nazar Muhammad, seeking post-arrest bail in a case registered under Sections 9-C and 15 of the Control of Narcotics Substances Act, 1997, following the alleged recovery of 2482 grams of charas from his possession. The core legal questions involve the competency of the CIA staff to conduct the investigation and whether the petitioner is entitled to bail given the heavy recovery falling within the prohibitory clause of Section 497 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The Islamabad High Court held that the investigation was duly authorized, the recovered quantity fell within the prohibitory clause carrying severe penalties, and the positive Chemical Examiner report further disentitled the petitioner to bail. The court dismissed the post-arrest bail petition while directing the trial court to conclude the trial within four months.
- Whether the CIA staff is competent to conduct an investigation under the Control of Narcotics Substances Act, 1997 upon proper authorization?
- Does the recovery of 2482 grams of charas fall within the prohibitory clause of Section 497 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898 to disentitle an accused from post-arrest bail?
- Whether a positive report from the Chemical Examiner regarding the recovered narcotic substance constitutes sufficient grounds to deny post-arrest bail at a tentative assessment stage?
- Section 9-C, Control of Narcotics Substances Act 1997
- Section 15, Control of Narcotics Substances Act 1997
- Section 497, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
ORDER
FIAZ AHMAD ANJUM JANDRAN, J. Through this Crl. Misc. petition, petitioner (Nazar Muhammad) seeks bail after arrest in F.I.R No. 14, dated 16.01.2021, registered under Sections 9-C and 15 of the Control of Narcotics Substances Act, 1997 ("Act of 1997") , at Police Station Golra Sharif, Islamabad.
2. The allegations set-forth in the F.I.R are that on 16.01.2021, at about 4:10 p.m, within the area of Shah Allah Ditta, near Dhok Meer Ali, Islamabad, police party intercepted the petitioner with a purple colour shopping bag. On search of the said shopper , 2482 grams Chars in the shape of two balls wrappe d in white colour shopper , was recovered.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in the case; that petitioner is behind the bars since arrest i.e. 16.01.2021; that the CIA staff is not competent to conduct investigation therefore, entitled to the concession of bail. Learned counsel relied upon case laws reported in 2012 SCMR 573, 2020 MLD 282 {Sindh (Hyderabad Bench)} 2018 P .Cr.L.J 590 {Lahore (Multan Bench)}.
4. Conversely , learned State Counsel argued that huge quantity of narcotics substance was recovered from the petitioner; that the proceedings conducted by the C.I.A staff are in accordance with law and that challan has been submitted, therefore, petitioner is not entitled to the concession of bail.
5. Arguments heard, record perused.
6. As far as registration of F.I.R by C.I.A is concerned, suffice it to say that record has been examined, wherein application duly forwarded by the DSP CIA Islamabad for permission to conduct investigation is available. The Investigating Officer confirmed that pursuant to said request, permission had been accorded, therefore, this ground is not available to the petitioner .
7. The petitioner is specifically nominated in the F.I.R that 2482 grams of "charas" was recovered from his possession. The statutory provisions on the subject entails death punishment, imprisonment for life or imprisonment up to 14 years, which falls within the ambit of prohibitory clause of Section 497 Cr.P.C, therefore, in such type of cases, no concession could be extended to the accused persons.
8. The sample parcels of the recovered substance were transmitted to the office of the Chemical Examiner within statutory period, reports whereof confirms that the recovered substance was Charas " this too, goes against the petitioner .
9. The challan has already been submitted in the Court on 20.01.2021 and trial is in progress. In such like situation, it would be appropriate to direct the learned Trial Court for conclusion of the trial within certain specified period.
10. The case laws relied upon by the learned counsel do not extend any help to the petitioner due to having distinct facts and circumstances.
11. In view of above, petitioner is not entitled to the concession of post arrest bail. Therefore, instant post arrest bail petition is dismissed . However , petitioner has a legitimate right to have early decision of his case, therefore, while relying upon case law reported as "2011 SCMR 1332 (Rehmatullah and another Vs. the State), the learned Trial Court is directed to conclude the trial within a period of four months from the receipt of the order under intimation to this Court.
12. Needless to mention that this is tentative assessment for the purpose of this petition only, which shall not affect/influence trial of this case in any manner .