SHAHID ALI Versus State
This petition for post-arrest bail arises from a criminal case registered under Section 9(b) of the Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997, involving the alleged recovery of heroin from the petitioner. The core legal question was whether the petitioner, a juvenile at the time of the alleged offence, was entitled to bail given the suspicious circumstances of the recovery and his age. The Court observed that the complainant conducted two separate raids on the same house within a four-hour window, recovering narcotics from the petitioner's mother and then the petitioner, which raised significant doubts regarding the prosecution's narrative. Furthermore, the absence of a Chemical Examiner's report to confirm the nature of the substance and the petitioner's status as a juvenile (aged 14-17 years) were critical factors. The Court held that these facts constituted special circumstances under Section 51(2) of the Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997. Consequently, the Court admitted the petitioner to bail, emphasizing that the juvenile status rendered the offence bailable under the Juvenile Justice System Ordinance, 2000.
- Does the absence of a Chemical Examiner's report regarding the recovered substance constitute a ground for granting bail in narcotics cases?
- Can the conduct of multiple raids on the same premises by the same complainant within a short timeframe be considered a special circumstance for bail?
- Does the Juvenile Justice System Ordinance 2000 render an offence under the Control of Narcotic Substances Act 1997 bailable for a juvenile?
- Section 9(b), Control of Narcotic Substances Act 1997
- Section 51(2), Control of Narcotic Substances Act 1997
- Section 10(5), Juvenile Justice System Ordinance 2000
ORDER
Through this petition Shahid Ali petitioner has sought post-arrest bail in case F.I.R. No.338 registered at Police Station Shan Kot, District Nankana Sahib on 16-9-2005 for an offence under section 9(b) of the Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997.
2. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and going through the record we have straightaway observed that at about 12-45 p.m. on 16-9-2005 the same complainant namely Muhammad Afzal, S.-I. had conducted a raid at the petitioner's house and had arrested the petitioner's mother namely Mst. Sakina Bibi after recovering heroin weighing 610 grams from her custody. The record of this case shows that on the same day at about 4-45 p.m. the same complainant had again conducted another raid on the same house and had arrested the present petitioner therefrom after recovering heroin weighing 710 grams from his custody. Conducting of two separate raids within a period of four hours by the same complainant on the same house and alleged recovery of separate quantities of herion from the petitioner's mother and from the petitioner in such separate raids conducted on the same day have been found by us to be a circumstance which raises eyebrows, to say the least. Admittedly no report has so far been received from the Chemical Examiner regarding a sample of the substance allegedly recovered from the petitioner's possession so as to confirm that the said substance was a narcotic substance. According to the record of investigation of this case petitioner was aged about 16/17 years' at the time of his arrest. The learned counsel for the petitioner has drawn our attention to the document appended with this petition as Annexure-C, according to which the petitioner was aged about fourteen years' at the time of his arrest. While placing reliance upon the said document the learned counsel for the petitioner has referred to the provisions of subsection (5) of section 10 of the Juvenile Justice System Ordinance, 2000 according to which the offence allegedly committed by the petitioner was bailable. We have found all these considerations to be special circumstances within the contemplation of the provisions of subsection (2) of section 51 of the Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997 so as to be sufficient for admitting the petitioner to bail. This petition is, therefore, allowed and the petitioner is admitted to bail subject to furnishing bail bond in the sum of Rs.50, 000 (Rupees fifty thousand only) with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court.
H.B.T./S-101/L ??????????? ??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? Bail granted.