BAHADUR KHAN alias TUNDA vs THE STATE
The petitioner sought post-arrest bail in a case registered under section 6/9 of the Control of Narcotics Substances Act, 1997, following the alleged recovery of 1200 grams of heroin, 1.5 kilograms of charas, and cash from his Baithak during a police raid, from which he allegedly escaped. The core legal question was whether the petitioner was entitled to bail given the heavy recovery of narcotics and his alleged criminal background. The Lahore High Court held that no case for bail was made out, dismissing the petition. The court reasoned that narcotics were recovered from the petitioner's premises, there was no proof of mala fides in the registration of the case, the petitioner had a prior criminal record involving drug trafficking, and reasonable grounds existed connecting him to an offense falling within the prohibitory clause of section 497 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898.
- Whether an accused is entitled to post-arrest bail when huge quantities of heroin and charas are recovered from his premises?
- Does a prior criminal record of drug trafficking bar the grant of bail under the prohibitory clause?
- Whether escape from the spot during a police raid disentitles an accused from claiming bail?
- Section 6/9, Control of Narcotics Substances Act 1997
- Section 497, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
ORDER
' Petitioner seeks bail in a case registered vide F.I.R. No,8 dated 10-1-1998, under section 6/9 of Control of Narcotics Substances Act, 1997, Police Station Mussa Khel, District Mianwali wherein it is alleged that on a source report to the effect that the petitioner indulged in drug trafficking, a raid was, conducted at his Baithak where he was selling the herion while sitting on a cot who having seen the police party decamped. On search 1200 grams Heroin, one and a half kilogram Charas and a cash of rupees two hundreds were recovered from the spot.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner has sought bail on the grounds that the case is false; that the petitioner is previous non-convict; that the F.I.R. Story is repellent to common sense inasmuch as it is not believable that the petitioner managed to escape from the spot in the presence of a raiding party consisting about fifteen police officials. He lastly contended that more than ten persons have sworn affidavits in favour of the petitioner.
3. Learned counsel for the State has opposed the prayer for bail according to him drug trafficking of heroin and Charas is a serious offence that the petitioner managed to escape at the time of raid, that the heroin, Charas and cash were recovered from his Baithak and that the petitioner has background similar cases.
4. Heard.
5. It is not denied that as per the prosecution case heroin, Charas and cash were recovered from petitioner's Baithak. There is nothing on record to show nor it has been pleaded that the case has been registered for mala fide reasons. There is another case of drug trafficking against the petitioner which is of a prior date. There are reasonable grounds that the petitioner is connected with the offence which falls within the prohibitory clause of section 497, Cr.P.C. No case for bail is made out. This petition is, therefore, dismissed.