MUHAMMAD RIAZ Versus State
This matter concerns a petition for post-arrest bail filed by the accused, Muhammad Riaz, who was charged under sections 6 and 9 of the Control of Narcotic Substances Act in connection with F.I.R. No. 562, registered at Police Station Gujarpura, Lahore. The core legal question before the Court was whether the petitioner was entitled to the concession of bail given the quantity of narcotics recovered and the duration of his pre-trial incarceration. The Court observed that the alleged recovery of 200 grams of indigenous Charas fell under the ambit of section 9(b) of the Control of Narcotic Substances Act, and that the maximum sentence prescribed for this offense did not fall within the prohibitory clause of the law. Furthermore, noting that the petitioner had been in custody since December 5, 2003, and that the trial had not yet commenced, the Court held that the petitioner was entitled to bail. Consequently, the Court granted the bail application, subject to the petitioner furnishing a bail bond in the sum of Rs. 20,000 with a local surety to the satisfaction of the trial Court.
- Is an accused entitled to bail when the maximum sentence for the charged offense does not fall within the prohibitory clause?
- Does the recovery of 200 grams of Charas fall under section 9(b) of the Control of Narcotic Substances Act?
- Should bail be granted when the trial has not yet commenced and the accused has been in custody for a significant period?
- Section 6, Control of Narcotic Substances Act 1997
- Section 9, Control of Narcotic Substances Act 1997
- Section 9(b), Control of Narcotic Substances Act 1997
ORDER
1. ALI NAWAZ CHOWHAN, J.‑‑‑ The matter pertains to case F.I.R. No.562, dated 5‑12‑2003 registered at Police Station Gujarpura, District Lahore, under sections 6/9 of the Control of Narcotic Substances Act.
2. The allegation against the petitioner is that he was found in A possession of 200 grams of indigenous Charas. As the maximum sentence in this case does not fall under the prohibitory clause and the case comes under the ambit of section 9(b) of the Control of Narcotic Substances Act and as the petitioner is in the lock‑up since 5‑12‑2003 and the trial has yet to commence, we allow him bail subject to his furnishing bail bond in the sum of Rs.20,000 with a local surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court.
3. H.B.T./M‑774/L
4. Bail granted.