2005 PLP 1056 (MLD)
SHAH NAWAZ‑‑‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑‑‑Respondent
| Citation | 2005 PLP 1056 (MLD) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | Single Bench |
| Parties | SHAH NAWAZ‑‑‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑‑‑Respondent |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)‑‑‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2005 PLP 1056 (MLD)?
This judgment primarily cites: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)‑‑‑ as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2005 PLP 1056 (MLD)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Honorable Judges.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2005 PLP 1056 (MLD) (SHAH NAWAZ‑‑‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑‑‑Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Gulfam Muslim Rana for Petitioner.
Headnotes / Summary
‑‑‑S.497‑‑‑Control of Narcotic Substances Act (XXV of 1997), Ss.6/9‑‑‑Bail, grant of‑‑‑Accused had no criminal history and was never involved in any criminal case of like nature‑‑‑Accused also did not have the notoriety as drug pusher‑‑‑Case against accused, prima facie, fell under S.9(b) of the Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997‑‑‑Accused being the first offender, bail was allowed to him in circumstances. Sohail Tariq for the State. Faiar Khan, A.S.‑I.
Judgment & Decree
Gulfam Muslim Rana for Petitioner. Sohail Tariq for the State. Faiar Khan, A.S.‑I. Shahnawaz‑petitioner seeks post‑arrest bail in case F.I.R. No.53 of 2004, dated 18‑1‑2004 registered under sections 6/9 of Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997, at Police Station Factory Area, Lahore.
2. The allegation against the petitioner is that on suspicion he was apprehended by the police on 18‑1‑2004 at about 12‑05 a.m. and from his possession 500 grams of Charas were recovered.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the petitioner was never involved in a case of like nature and he was implicated in this case mala fidely, by the police and that even otherwise his case does not fall within the Prohibitory Clause of section 497, Cr.P.C. Learned counsel for the State vehemently opposed the grant of boil to the petitioner.
4. With the assistance of learned counsel for the parties record of this case has been perused. The petitioner has no criminal history and was never involved in any criminal case of like nature. He also does not have the notoriety as drug pusher either. Being first offender and for the reason that case under section 9(b) of Control of Narcotics Substance Act, 1997 is made out against the petitioner, the petitioner is admitted to bail subject to furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs.1,00,000 (Rupees One lac) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court. N.H.Q./5‑312/L Bail allowed.