Zaigham Abbas vs State and another
This matter arises from a petition for post-arrest bail filed by Zaigham Abbas in case F.I.R. No. 326 dated 18.6.2019, registered under Section 9(c) of the Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997 at Police Station Qilla Deedar Singh, District Gujranwala, involving the alleged recovery of 1120 grams of charas. The core legal question concerns whether the offense falls under Section 9(b) or 9(c) given that the recovered quantity marginally exceeds one kilogram and the record is silent on whether the weight included the wrapper, alongside the evidentiary value of the Punjab Forensic Science Agency report. The Lahore High Court held that the petitioner is entitled to post-arrest bail. The ratio decidendi is that where the recovered narcotic quantity marginally exceeds the threshold and forensic reports do not wholly corroborate the prosecution, coupled with the fact that the case is not hit by the statutory embargo and the petitioner has been incarcerated without trial conclusion, continued detention amounts to preventive punishment. The key principle laid down is that marginal excess in narcotic quantity combined with inconclusive forensic corroboration and lack of necessity for continuous incarceration warrants the grant of post-arrest bail.
- Does a marginal excess of narcotic contraband over one kilogram raise a question for trial regarding applicability of Section 9(b) or 9(c) of the Control of Narcotic Substances Act 1997?
- Can post-arrest bail be granted when the Punjab Forensic Science Agency report does not wholly corroborate the prosecution version?
- Is continuous detention for an indefinite period permissible when the accused is behind bars and the investigation is complete?
- Section 9(b), Control of Narcotic Substances Act 1997
- Section 9(c), Control of Narcotic Substances Act 1997
- Section 51, Control of Narcotic Substances Act 1997
ORDER
Zaigham Abbas, petitioner seeks post arrest bail in case F.I.R. No. 326, dated 18.6.2019 under Section 9(c) of Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997 registered at Police Qilla Deedar Singh, district Gujranwala.
2. Allegedly , 1120 grams charas was recovered from the petitioner .
3. Having heard the arguments addressed at the bar and after perusing the record, it was noticed that the quantity of the alleged contraband charas recovered from the petitioner marginally exceeds from one kilogram and thus this would be interesting question for the learned trial Court to determine if the case of the petitioner falls under Section 9(b) or 9(c) of CNSA, 1997. The record is silent if the case property was put on the scale with or without wrapper .
The petitioner is behind the bars since his arrest and no body can be detained in jail by way of advance punishment. The investigation in this case is complete. The report of Punjab Forensic Science Agency does not wholly corroborate the prosecution version. The petitioner is in jail since his arrest and his continuous detention for indefinite period would be unfair . The case of the petitioner is also not hit by the embargo of Section 51 of CNSA, 1997, thus, I am inclined to exercise my discretion in favour of the petitioner .
4. For the foregoing reasons, the application is allowed and the petitioner is admit ted to post arrest bail subject to his furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs. 2,00,000/- with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court/Deuty Judge. revisions by the competent authorities. Therefore, it is advisable to consult the official sources or legal professionals for the most up-to-date and accurate information.