MUHAMMAD AFZAL DARZI vs STATE
This petition for leave to appeal was filed against the Lahore High Court's dismissal of a bail application in a narcotics case. The petitioner, Muhammad Afzal Darzi, was arrested for possessing 1500 grams of heroin, with charges under the Prohibition (Enforcement of Hadd) Order, 1979, and the Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997. The High Court had initially denied bail, citing a statutory bar under the Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997. Before the Supreme Court, the petitioner argued that the case was fabricated due to police enmity and emphasized his prolonged detention. While the State conceded that, per recent Supreme Court precedent, there is no absolute bar to granting bail in such cases, the Supreme Court declined to grant bail at this stage, citing the large quantity of heroin recovered and the fact that the statutory period for detention had not yet expired. However, the Court directed the trial court to conclude the proceedings within three months, granting the petitioner liberty to renew his bail application if the trial remains unfinished by that deadline.
- Does Section 51 of the Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997, impose an absolute bar on the grant of bail in narcotics cases?
- Can the Supreme Court direct a trial court to conclude proceedings within a specific timeframe to address prolonged detention?
- Is the recovery of a large quantity of narcotics a valid ground for refusing bail despite the absence of an absolute statutory bar?
- Article 3, Prohibition (Enforcement of Hadd) Order, 1979
- Article 4, Prohibition (Enforcement of Hadd) Order, 1979
- Section 9, Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997
- Section 51, Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997
' IJAZ NISAR, J.---Leave to appeal is sought against the judgment, dated 29-9-1998, passed by a Division Bench of the Lahore High Court, Multan Bench, Multan, dismissing Criminal Miscellaneous No.1178-B of 1998.
2. The facts, in brief, are that Muhammad Afzal Darzi, the petitioner herein, was arrested on 29-11- 1997 in Case F.I.R. No.382 of 1997 under Article 3/4 of the Prohibition (Enforcement of Hadd) Order, 1979, and section 9 of the Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997, for being found in possession of 1500 grams of heroin. He applied for the grant of bail to the High Court, but the learned Judges dismissed his bail application on the ground that section 51 of the Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997, barred the grant of bail. Hence, this petition.
3. It is contended that the case against the petitioner is based on absolutely false allegations and is outcome of his father's enmity with the police and that the recovery is fake. His long detention is also urged as a ground for the grant of bail.
4. We have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Additional Advocate- General appearing on behalf of the State. The learned Additional Advocate-General states that the trial of the petitioner could not conclude due to the pendency of large number of cases before the trial Court and requests for the fixation of a time limit for the conclusion of the trial. He, however, concedes that in view of the recent judgment of this Court in Criminal Petition No.391-L of 1998, titled Gulzaman v. The State, there is no bar on the grant of bail in appropriate case registered under the Control of Narcotic Substances Act.
5. Keeping in view the huge quantity of heroin allegedly recovered from the possession of the petitioner and the fact that the statutory period is not yet over, we do not feel persuaded to grant bail to the petitioner. However, we direct the learned trial Court to conclude the trial within a period of three months from the date of this order, failing which the petitioner may repeat his bail application.
' The petition is disposed of in the above terms.
Cited by 1 case
- NOOR REHMAN And Another vs THE STATE 2011 YLR 172