2002 PLP 3600 (YLR)
MUHAMMAD SAEED‑‑‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑‑‑Respondent
| Citation | 2002 PLP 3600 (YLR) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | Ch. Iftikhar Hussain and Farrukh Latif, JJ |
| Parties | MUHAMMAD SAEED‑‑‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑‑‑Respondent |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)‑‑‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2002 PLP 3600 (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 2002 PLP 3600 (YLR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Ch. Iftikhar Hussain and Farrukh Latif, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2002 PLP 3600 (YLR) (MUHAMMAD SAEED‑‑‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑‑‑Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Muhammad Arif Alvi for Petitioner.
- Date of hearing: 25th June, 2002,
Headnotes / Summary
‑‑‑‑S.497‑‑‑Control of Narcotic Substances Act (XXV of 1997), S.9(b)‑‑‑Bail, grant of‑‑ Charas weighing 510 grams was recovered from the possession of accused‑‑‑Accused had been found to be innocent during investigation‑‑‑Accused was behind the bars for the last six months and he was not previous convict‑‑‑Embargo placed by S.51 of Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997 would not come in the way of accused to grant of bail to him‑‑‑Accused was admitted to bail, in circumstances. Malik Abdul Ghaffar for the State.
Judgment & Decree
Malik Abdul Ghaffar for the State. Date of hearing: 25th June, 2002, Muhammad Saeed petitioner has sought for the relief of post‑arrest bail in case F.I.R. No.409 dated 9‑12‑2001 under section 9‑B of Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997 registered at Police Station Jahanaian District Khanewal.
2. Briefly the allegation against the petitioner as per F.I.R. is that on 9‑12‑2001 Charas weighing 510 grams was recovered from his possession.
3. It has been manly contended on behalf of the petitioner that he has been falsely roped in merely for the reason that narcotics was recovered from his `Bhanna' (cattle shed) while it was not at all recovered from his possession; that during the investigation he has been found innocent, and that he is behind the bars for the last about six months and is not previous convict.
4. Learned State counsel has opposed this bail petition but has conceded that during the investigation the petitioner has been found innocent.
5. We have considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the State with the help of the record.
6. As per F.I.R. 510 grams charas was H recovered from the possession of the petitioner. Admittedly he has been found to be innocent during the investigation and his version raised in the investigation to be correct. He is behind the bars for the last six months and is not previous convict. The embargo placed by section 51, C.N.S.A. will not come in his way to the grant of bail. We find that it is a fit case for the enlargement of the petitioner on bail. In this view of the matter. we accept this petition and admit the petitioner to bail in the sum of Rs.50,000 with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court. H.B.T./M‑1434/L Bail granted.