2011 PLP 1865 (MLD)
MUHAMMAD SHEHZAD — Petitioner Versus THE STATE and another — Respondents
| Citation | 2011 PLP 1865 (MLD) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | MUHAMMAD SHEHZAD — Petitioner Versus THE STATE and another — Respondents |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2011 PLP 1865 (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 2011 PLP 1865 (MLD)?
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: 2011 PLP 1865 (MLD) (MUHAMMAD SHEHZAD — Petitioner Versus THE STATE and another — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Mian Jameel Akhtar for Petitioner.
Headnotes / Summary
S.497
Control of Narcotic Substances Act (XXV of 1997), S.9(c)
Possessing narcotic drug
Previous bail application filed by accused in High Court had been withdrawn by his counsel after arguing the same at full length
Huge quantity of "charas" weighing six kilograms had been recovered from the accused
Challan had been submitted in the court
Accused was not entitled to the relief of post-arrest bail at present stage
Judgment & Decree
This is 2nd post-arrest bail petition filed by the petitioner before this Court. The first one bearing Criminal Miscellaneous No.13206-B of 2010 was dismissed as withdrawn in terms of order dated 25-11-2010.
2. Petitioner Muhammad Shehzad, by means of instant petition, has sought for his post arrest bail in case F.I.R. No.18, dated 21-6-2010, registered under section 9(c)/15 of the Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997, with Police Station ANF, Faisalabad.
3. Allegation against the petitioner, in brief, as per contents of the F.I.R., is that on 21-6-2010, he was apprehended by the police and from his possession contraband charas weighing 6-Kgs was recovered.
4. It is argued by the learned counsel for the petitioner that he has falsely been implicated in this case. Learned counsel further states that quantity of the recovered contraband charas is fake and fictious, which is planted one. As a matter of fact, learned counsel submits, the petitioner divorced sister of one Ejaz constable and due to this reason, he has been involved in so many false cases. It is lastly argued on his behalf that the petitioner is behind the bars for the last six months and his person is no more required by the police for further investigation, therefore, he is entitled to the concession of bail.
5. On the other hand, learned Special Prosecutor ANF has opposed this petition with vehemence with the averments that huge quantity of contraband charas was recovered from the petitioner. It is also argued that challan of the case has been submitted on 21-6-2010 and in view of ratio decidendi of august Supreme Court of Pakistan in the case of The State through Force Commander, Anti-Narcotics Force, Rawalpindi v. Khalid Sharif (2006 SCMR 1265), the petitioner is not entitled to the relief of post-arrest bail at this stage.
6. Arguments led pro and contra have been heard. We have also gone through the record available on file.
7. Admittedly earlier post-arrest bail petition filed by the petitioner bearing Criminal Miscellaneous No.13206-B of 2010 was withdrawn by his learned counsel after arguing the same at full length. Moreover, a huge quantity of contraband charas weighing 6-Kgs was recovered from the petitioner. The learned Special Prosecutor has also informed that challan in the case stands submitted on 21-6-2010. Therefore, in view of dictum of law of august Supreme Court of Pakistan in the case of The State through Force Commander, Anti-Narcotics Force, Rawalpindi v. Khalid Sharif (2006 SCMR 1265), we are not inclined to extend the relief of post-arrest bail to the petitioner at this stage. The instant petition, therefore, stands dismissed. N.H.Q./M-61/L Bail refused.