FATIMA BIBI Versus State Ch. Nawab Ali Meo
Fatima Bibi filed a petition seeking post-arrest bail in a case registered under section 9(c) of the Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997, following the alleged recovery of 1250 grams of Charas from her house. The core legal question was whether the petitioner was entitled to bail given the delayed chemical examiner report, her status as a first-offender woman falling under the proviso to section 497 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898, and the arguable mala fides involving a previous police case. The Lahore High Court held that the non-receipt of the chemical examiner report, coupled with the arguable mala fides and her status as a woman in continuous detention without prospect of early trial conclusion, made it a fit case for further inquiry. The court laid down the principle that an accused person, particularly a woman with no previous criminal record, cannot be detained indefinitely for trial when the chemical report is awaited and reasonable grounds for further inquiry exist regarding her alleged implication.
- Does the non-receipt of a chemical examiner report regarding recovered narcotics constitute a ground for further inquiry for the grant of bail?
- Whether a woman accused of a non-bailable narcotics offense falls within the beneficial proviso to section 497 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898?
- Can the possibility of mala fide implication by police officials due to previous litigation warrant the release of an accused on post-arrest bail?
- Section 9(c), Control of Narcotic Substances Act 1997
- Section 497, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
- Section 324, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 452, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 379, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 148, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 149, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 354, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 337-A(i), Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 337-A(ii), Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 347, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
ORDER
Fatima Bibi petitioner seeks post-arrest bail in case F.I.R. No.93/2009 dated 21-5-2009, registered under section 9(c) of the C.N.S.A., 1997 at Police Station Raja Jang District Kasur.
2. Precise allegations against the petitioner, as per narration of the F.I.R, are that during the raid conducted by the police 1250 grams Charas was recovered lying on a cot in her house.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case due to the reason that a case F.I.R. No.331 of 2008 was registered at the same police station on 26-12-2008 on the application of Muhammad Mushtaq under sections 324/452/379/148/149/354/337-A(i)/337-A(ii)/347, P.P.C. in which husband of the petitioner Muhammad Mushtaq alias Warraich was one of the accused persons. She was pursuing that case and the complainant of that case is a constable in Elite Force and the police with his active connivance got the case registered against the petitioner with mala fide intention and ulterior motive. He further contends that the petitioner is first offender and is behind the bars for the last about six months, as such, being a woman his case falls under the proviso to section 497, Cr.P.C. as she is entitled for the grant of bail.
4. Learned D.P.-G. opposes the bail application on the ground that a huge quantity of narcotic has been recovered from the possession of the petitioner and that she is not entitled to be released on bail.
5. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and also perused the record. The petitioner is continuously behind the bars since 21-5-2009, but so far according to the A.S-I present along with the record, the report of the Chemical Examiner has not been received and for the time being it cannot be said that the substance allegedly recovered from the petitioner was Charas. Even otherwise, learned counsel for the petitioner has placed on record copy of another F.I.R. No.331 registered on 26-12-2008 in which the petitioner was pursuing the case of her husband and complainant of the said case is a constable of Elite Force. The possibility cannot be ruled that he has maneuvered the implication of the petitioner in the present case, who has no previous record and is also a woman, whose case falls within the proviso to section 497, Cr.P.C. The learned counsel has rightly relied upon the order dated 14-9-2009 passed by this Court in Criminal Miscellaneous No.11084-B of 2009 in which bail was allowed to the accused from whom Charas of the same quantity was recovered and he remained behind the bars for five months. The relevant portion is reproduced as under:---
"Personal search of the petitioner yielded 1020 grams of Charas which makes it a borderline case. The petitioner does not have the antecedents of a drug dealer or a drug peddler as he has not been involved in any case of similar nature in the past.
In such circumstances we find it a fit case for the grant of bail to the petitioner, who cannot be detained behind the bars for indefinite period when on the one hand she has succeeded in making out a case of further inquiry and on the other hand there is no possibility of conclusion of the trial in the near future. Accordingly, this petition is allowed and the petitioner is admitted to bail subject to her furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs.1,00,000 with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court.
N.H.Q./F-81/L Bail allowed.
Cited by 1 case
- Mir IFTIKHAR AHMED vs THE STATE 2012 P Cr. L J 235