2017 P Cr (PLP)
SHAUKAT ALI — Petitioner Versus The STATE and others — Respondents
| Citation | 2017 P Cr (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | SHAUKAT ALI — Petitioner Versus The STATE and others — Respondents |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2017 P Cr (PLP)?
This judgment primarily cites: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2017 P Cr (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: N/A.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2017 P Cr (PLP) (SHAUKAT ALI — Petitioner Versus The STATE and others — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Muhammad Ajmal Adil for Petitioner.
- Sajjad Mehmood Butt, Special Prosecutor for ANF for Respondents.
Headnotes / Summary
S. 497
Control of Narcotic Substances Act (XXV of 1997), Ss. 9(c) & 15
Possession of narcotic drugs, aiding, abetment or association in narcotic offences
Complainant (police official) had alleged that on spy information a raid was conducted and Charas (narcotic) was recovered and accused was apprehended in company of co-accused from the place of recovery
Case of prosecution was that one co-accused while driving car arrived at venue of recovery and in the meanwhile second co-accused along with accused came there and second co-accused received polythene bag from one co-accused whereas rest of Charas was recovered from beneath the driving seat on pointation of one co-accused
No recovery was effected from the person of accused
Mere fact that accused was accompanying the co-accused from whose possession Charas was recovered, his active involvement in the crime was to be determined at the time of trial after recording of evidence
Case of accused fell within the ambit of further inquiry and probe
Bail was granted accordingly.
Judgment & Decree
The petitioner namely Shaukat Ali seeks post-arrest bail in case FIR No. 39 dated 21st of October, 2016 under sections 9(c) and 15 of The Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997 (hereinafter referred as "C.N.S.A., 1997"), registered at Police Station ANF District Faisalabad.
2. As per allegations contained in the FIR, on spy information a raid was conducted, in pursuance thereof, Charas weighing 4800 grams each was recovered from Abdul Basit and Feroz Khan, whereas petitioner was apprehended from the place of recovery being in the company of his co-accused Feroz Khan.
3. Heard. Record perused.
4. It is an admitted position on the record that no recovery was effected from the person of the petitioner. He was arrayed as accused merely on the fact that he was accompanying his co-accused namely Feroz Khan from whose possession Charas weighing 4800 grams was recovered. It is prosecution's own case that co-accused Abdul Basit while driving Car No. LXD-604 arrived at the venue of recovery and in the meanwhile co-accused Feroz Khan along with petitioner came there. Feroz Khan received a polythene bag from Abdul Basit which when searched contained 4800 grams Charas whereas rest of Charas weighing 4800 grams was recovered from beneath the driving seat on the pointation of Abdul Basit.
5. At bail stage, only tentative assessment of the material available is required and deeper appreciation is not permissible. We have noticed that prosecution has failed to bring on record any tangible material connecting the petitioner with the alleged crime. Mere being in the company of co-accused at a thoroughfare is not sufficient to hold the Petitioner guilty of the crime. Though section 15 of C.N.S.A., 1997 was also levelled in the FIR but the question of active involvement of the petitioner in the crime in order to establish that he has assisted his co-accused in any manner is to be determined at the time of trial after recording of evidence. We are thus, of the considered view that the case of the petitioner clearly falls within the ambit of further inquiry and probe and he is entitled to be released on bail on this score alone. Reliance is placed on the case of Jamal-ud-Din alias Zubair Khan v. The State (2012 SCMR 573).
6. The petitioner was arrested on 21st of October, 2016 and still awaiting his trial, the conclusion of which is not in sight in near future. Thus keeping the petitioner behind the bars for an indefinite period would serve no useful purpose.
7. For what has been discussed above, we are inclined to allow the instant petition and enlarge the petitioner Shaukat Ali on post-arrest bail subject to furnishing his bail bonds in the sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rs. One lac only) with Two sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of learned trial Court.
8. Needless to observe that the observations made hereinabove are only tentative in their nature and are strictly confined to the extent of grant of instant bail. WA/S-11/L Bail granted.