MUHAMMAD AKRAM Versus STATE

ORDER

A case under section 23/27, Drugs Act, 1976 was registered against the petitioner on 14‑10‑1995 as he was found in possession of 152 injections of Choloremphe, which were of unregistered brand being a banned item for sale.

2. Since the Drugs Court is not functioning, therefore, the petitioner has applied for bail to this Court.

3. It is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the case was registered at the police station on the report of Drug Inspector without having recourse to the provisions contained in section 19 of the said Act, which inter alia provides procedure for Inspector to be followed for the registration of a case. According to the procedure, the Inspector had to make a report for any contravention of the Act to the Provincial Quality Control Board for initiation of criminal action.

4. It is further contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that no such procedure was followed and as such the registration of the case was bad in the eye of law.

5. On merits it was contended that there was no evidence on record that contra‑banned injections were being sold by the petitioner or were offered to be sold by him. The mere fact that there was averment in the F.I.R. that he was carrying the same for sale would not make him liable under section 23/27 of the Drugs Act. .

6. The learned counsel for the State submitted that he was unable to find out any provision authorising the Inspector for lodging complaint with the police A without referring the matter to the Provincial Quality Control Board. He, however, submitted that the offence was of serious nature because the injections were injurious to the human health.

7. I have considered the foregoing submissions and find that reference to the Board before registration of the case was necessary as held in 1994 Pakistan Criminal Law Journal 1065 (Peshawar) and 1994 Pakistan Criminal Law Journal 1457 (Lahore). There is no doubt that the sale of such injections is highly hazardous and injurious to the public health but no one has thought of plugging the lacuna which hinder filing of complaint in such cognizable offences. This needs attention of the Legislature, so that proper procedure should be evolved by removing the clog in the way of registration of case. As long as the present law remains in existence, the offenders would not hesitate to take benefit of the defect found therein. The Drug Court is not functioning because of the non availability of its members. This vacuum in law should also be rectified by making proper provisions in the relevant Act.

8. Now coming back to the facts of the case the challan is ready for ‑submission to the Court and the same was allegedly submitted by the relevant police, but was returned with the objection that it should be sent through the Drug Inspector. The petitioner is already behind the bars since his arrest in July 1995.

9. In view of the above situation, allowing this petition, I admit the petitioner to bail in the sum of Rs.50,000 with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of Assistant Commissioner, Layyah. .

10. A copy of this order shall be sent to Federal Government for taking steps to remove the flaws in relevant law as indicated supra.

N.H.Q./M‑14/L Bail granted.