2000 PLP 144 (MLD)
BAHADUR KHAN alias TUNDA‑‑‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑‑‑Respondent
| Citation | 2000 PLP 144 (MLD) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore, |
| Bench Members | Rashid Aziz Khan, C.J. and Tassaduq Hussain Jilani, J |
| Parties | BAHADUR KHAN alias TUNDA‑‑‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑‑‑Respondent |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)‑‑‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2000 PLP 144 (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 2000 PLP 144 (MLD)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore, bench comprising: Rashid Aziz Khan, C.J. and Tassaduq Hussain Jilani, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2000 PLP 144 (MLD) (BAHADUR KHAN alias TUNDA‑‑‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑‑‑Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Shaharyar Sheikh for Petitioner.
Headnotes / Summary
‑‑‑‑S. 497‑‑‑Control of Narcotic Substances Act (XXV of 1997), S. 9(c)‑‑‑Bail, grant of‑‑‑Recovery of 1200 grams of heroin and one and a half kilograms of Charas was effected from the accused‑‑‑Earlier another case of drug trafficking stood registered against the accused‑‑‑Neither recovery of the narcotics was denied nor any mala fide in registration of the case was pleaded‑‑‑Reasonable grounds existed to connect accused with offence falling within prohibitory clause of S. 497, Cr.P.C.‑‑‑Accused was not entitled to bail in circumstances. C.M. Latif for the State.
Judgment & Decree
Shaharyar Sheikh for Petitioner. C.M. Latif for the State. Petitioner seeks bail in a case registered vide F.I.R. No.8 dated 10‑1‑1998, under section 6/9 of Control of Narcotics Substances Act, 1997, Police Station Mussa Khel, District Mianwali wherein it is alleged that on a source report to the effect that the petitioner indulged in drug trafficking, a raid was conducted at his Baithak where he was selling the herion while sitting on a cot who having seen the police party decamped. On search 1200 grams Heroin, one and a half kilogram Charas and a cash of rupees two hundreds were recovered from the spot.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner has sought bail on the grounds that the case is false; that the petitioner is previous non‑convict; that the F.I.R. story is repellent to common sense inasmuch as it is not believable that the petitioner managed to escape from the spot in the presence of a raiding party consisting about fifteen police officials. He lastly contended that more than ten persons have sworn affidavits in favour of the petitioner.
3. Learned counsel for the State has opposed the prayer for bail according to him drug trafficking of heroin and Charas is a serious offence that the petitioner managed to escape at the time of raid, that the heroin, Charas and cash were recovered from his Baithak and that the petitioner has background similar cases.
4. Heard.
5. It is not denied that as per the prosecution case heroin, Charas and cash were recovered from petitioner's Baithak. There is nothing on record to show nor it has been pleaded that the case has been registered for mala fide reasons. There is another case of drug trafficking against the petitioner which is of a prior date. There are reasonable grounds that the petitioner is connected with the offence which falls within the prohibitory clause of section 497, Cr.P.C. No case for bail is made out. This petition is, therefore, dismissed. Q.M.H./M.A.K./B‑76/L Bail refused.