2006 PLP 1833 (YLR)
MUHAMMAD RAZZAQ — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent
| Citation | 2006 PLP 1833 (YLR) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | Khawaja Muhammad Sharif and M. A. Shahid Siddiqui, JJ |
| Parties | MUHAMMAD RAZZAQ — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2006 PLP 1833 (YLR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2006 PLP 1833 (YLR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Khawaja Muhammad Sharif and M. A. Shahid Siddiqui, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2006 PLP 1833 (YLR) (MUHAMMAD RAZZAQ — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Ch. Muhammad Akram for Petitioner.
- The learned counsel for petitioner submits that no time of alleged recovery has been mentioned in the complaint and the offence falls under section 9(b) of the Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997, so the petitioner is entitled to the concession of bail.
Headnotes / Summary
S. 497
Control of Narcotic Substances Act (XXV of 1997), Ss.9(b) & 51-A
Accused was apprehended with one kilogram of "Phakki" which was a narcotic substance
Bail could not be granted to accused in view of S.51-A of Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997. Ch. Muhammad Sharif for A.N.F. Tariq, A.S.-I., with Record.
Judgment & Decree
The learned counsel for petitioner submits that no time of alleged recovery has been mentioned in the complaint and the offence falls under section 9(b) of the Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997, so the petitioner is entitled to the concession of bail.
2. On the other hand, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of ANF has submitted that one kilogram of the narcotic substance has been recovered from the petitioner and this Court in Crl. Misc. No.7484-B of 2005 has dismissed the bail application of accused in whose possession the same quantity of narcotic was recovered.
3. We have heard the learned counsel for parties. The petitioner was apprehended with one kilogram of "Phakki", which has been declared a narcotic substance by a Full Bench of this Court. So the bail cannot be granted to the petitioner in view of section 51-A of the Control of Narcotic Substances Act. This petition is, therefore, dismissed.
4. At this stage the learned counsel submits that the challan has not been submitted. On the other hand the A.S.-I., who has brought on record after going through the Zimi has submitted that the challan has already been submitted on 20-7-2005. The learned trial Court is directed to conclude the trial expeditiously. H.B.T./M-42/L??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? Bail refused.