MLD 2012

2012 PLP 1542 (MLD)

NOOR KHAN — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent

Jurisdiction / Court
Peshawar
Decided Date
2012-July-9
Honorable Judges
N/A
Case Reference Summary (AEO Optimized)
Citation 2012 PLP 1542 (MLD)
Forum / Court Peshawar
Bench Members N/A
Parties NOOR KHAN — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent
Primary Law Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)
💡 Quick Legal QA & Summary / سوال و جواب خلاصہ
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2012 PLP 1542 (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 2012 PLP 1542 (MLD)?

The case was heard and decided by the Peshawar bench comprising: N/A.

Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?

Cite this legal precedent as: 2012 PLP 1542 (MLD) (NOOR KHAN — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.

Laws Cited

Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)

Representation

  • Arshad Hussain Yousafzai for Petitioner.

Headnotes / Summary

S.497

Control of Narcotic Substances Act (XXV of 1997), S.9(c)

Possessing narcotic

Bail, grant of

Accused had no past criminal history, as neither he was previously booked for such crime nor had been convicted

Case being of borderline, benefit of the same would go to accused

Accused was admitted to bail, in circumstances.

Judgment & Decree

DOST MUHAMMAD KHAN, C.J.

Petitioner, Noor Khan, is seeking bail in case F.I.R. No.321 dated 1-6-2012 registered for crime under section 9(c) CNS Act by Police Station Toru (Mardan) because on the fateful at 14-30 hours he was apprehended by Ibrahim Shah Khan, S.H.O. Police Station Toru when he was carrying in his trouser fold 3600 grams of chars. Arguments heard and record perused.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner produced judgment of this Court dated 1-8-2011 where bail was granted to the accused-petitioner charged for offence under section 9(c), CNS Act almost for similar quantity of narcotics.

3. The learned State Counsel conceded that there is no past criminal history of the petitioner as neither he was previously booked for such crime nor has been convicted.

4. The question arises is whether he would be awarded the maximum sentence provided in section 9(c) C.N.S. Act or the trial Court would opt for the lesser one, hence, it is a borderline case, the benefit of which shall go to the accused-petitioner. Accordingly, this petition for bail is allowed and the petitioner is directed to be released on bail provided he furnishes bail bond in the sum of rupees one lac (Rs.1,00,000) with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of Illaqa/Judicial Magistrate, who shall ensure that the sureties are local, reliable and men of means. H.B.T./241/P Bail granted.