MLD 2023

2023 PLP 643 (MLD)

AKHTAR MUHAMMAD — Petitioner Versus The STATE — Respondent

Jurisdiction / Court
Peshawar
Decided Date
2021-December-17
Honorable Judges
N/A
Case Reference Summary (AEO Optimized)
Citation 2023 PLP 643 (MLD)
Forum / Court Peshawar
Bench Members N/A
Parties AKHTAR MUHAMMAD — 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 2023 PLP 643 (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 2023 PLP 643 (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: 2023 PLP 643 (MLD) (AKHTAR MUHAMMAD — 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

  • Shabina Noor for Petitioner.

Headnotes / Summary

S. 497

Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Control of Narcotic Substances Act (XXXI of 2019), Ss. 9(d) & 11(b)

Possession of narcotics

Bail, grant of

Contradictory evidence

Un-natural conduct

Non-association of independent witnesses

Scope

Accused sought bail after arrest in an FIR lodged under Ss. 9(d) & 11(b) of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 2019

Contraband, as per FIR, was recovered on 29.8.2021 while according to the entries made in Register XIX (Store-Room Register), the contraband was recovered on 28.8.2021

Such contradiction in the documents had put the case against accused under heavy doubt

Site plan showed that place of occurrence was a public place where the police squad/party could be noticed from a considerable distance

In such situation, despite having a vehicle, no attempt on the part of accused for his escape was made

Recovery of narcotics from the fuel tank of the vehicle, without disclosing the alternate source enabling the vehicle to move, was a debatable question to be resolved by the Trial Court

No independent witness had been associated with the alleged recovery

Investigation was complete and the accused was no more required to the prosecution for the very purpose, therefore, his further incarceration in jail would not serve any useful purpose

Bail petition was accepted, in circumstances.

Judgment & Decree

LAL JAN KHATTAK, J.

Petitioner Akhtar Muhammad seeks his post arrest bail in case FIR No.115 dated 29.08.2021 under sections 9-D/11-B Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 2019 of Police Station Excise Peshawar, wherein, he is charged for possessing 2000 grams opium and 900 grams ice recovered from the fuel tank of a vehicle.

2. Arguments heard and record gone through.

3. According to FIR and recovery memo the case contraband has been recovered on 29.08.2021 while according to the entries made in Register No.19, extract of which is available on case file, the said contraband has been recovered on 28.08.2021 which contradiction in both these important documents has put the petitioner's case under heavy doubt benefit of which is to be given to him even at bail stage. Apart from the above, the site plan would show that place of occurrence is situated at a juncture of interlinked roads, where every time number of vehicles ply and the police squad/party can be noticed from a considerable distance. In the situation, despite having a vehicle!, no attempt on the part of accused for his escape from the spot, is a question to be resolved by the learned trial Court after recoding pro and contra evidence. Recovery of narcotics from the fuel tank of the vehicle, without disclosing the alternate source enabling the vehicle to move, is also a debatable question to be resolved by the learned trial Court during the course of trial. Record further reveals that no independent witness has been associated with the alleged recovery. Investigation in the case is complete and he accused-petitioner is no more required to he prosecution for the very purpose, therefore, his further incarceration in jail would not serve any useful purpose.

4. For what has been discussed above, this court is of the view that the petitioner has made out a case arguable for his release on bail, therefore, this bail petition is accepted and it is directed that he be released on bail provided he submits bail bonds in the sum of Rs.1,00,000/- with two Sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of learned trial court. SA/117/P Bail granted.