IRSHAD vs THE STATE
The accused-petitioner sought post-arrest bail in a case registered under section 9 of the Control of Narcotic Substances Act 1997, following the alleged recovery of 1000 grams of opium from his chappals during a vehicle search by local police. The core legal question was whether the petitioner was entitled to the concession of bail given the quantity of narcotics recovered and the positive forensic science laboratory report. The Peshawar High Court dismissed the bail petition, holding that although the offence fell under a clause carrying a maximum punishment of seven years, the menace and mischief caused by narcotics smugglers to society and the youth weighed against granting bail. The court laid down that courts must consider the broader threat posed by narcotics to the community when exercising discretion on bail applications in drug-related offences, while issuing directions for the expeditious submission of the challan and conclusion of the trial.
- Whether an accused found in possession of 1000 grams of opium is entitled to post-arrest bail?
- Does the threat and menace of narcotics to society constitute a valid ground for refusing bail in offences carrying a maximum punishment of seven years?
- Section 9, Control of Narcotic Substances Act 1997
' Having been involved in case registered vide F.I.R. No,109, dated 20-4-2003 at Police Station Pezu under section 9 C.N.S.A. The accused-petitioner submitted an application for his release on bail in the Court of learned Sessions Judge, Lakki Marwat but his application was dismissed vide order, dated 5-5-2003. Now he has moved this Court for his release on bail.
2. Local police had laid a berricade (Naka Bandi) at Check Post Wanda Banochi, Bannu Dera Road.
A Bus bearing No,1499 coming from Bannu was signalled to stop. The same was searched and a person found in suspicious condition was deboarded from the said bus. On search 1000 grams of opium was recovered from his Chappals. The said person was arrested. From both Chappals 4 grams each was separated and sent to F.S.L. For report, whereas the remaining opium was kept in sealed parcels and case against him was registered.
3. I have heard Mr. Muhammad Ashraf Khan learned counsel representing the petitioner and Mr. Ahmad Jan representing the State and perused the record.
4. In the case in hand 1000 grams of opium was recovered from the possession of the accused- petitioner. The recovery was duly witnessed by two police officials, who are as good witnesses as any other persons. There is no or enmity between the accused-petitioner and marginal witnesses of recovery memo. Who fully support the case of prosecution. The F.S.L. Report is in positive.
Although the case of the accused-petitioner falls within clause (b) of section 9 of C.N.S.A. And the A maximum punishment provided therefor is seven years, but keeping the threat, menace and mischief caused by the narcotics smugglers to the society at large and particularly the youth of this country, I am not inclined to release the accused-petitioner on bail. Resultantly his bail application is dismissed. The prosecution is directed to submit the challan of the case within a fortnight and the learned trial Court is directed to conclude the same within a period of four months.