2007 PLP 1822 (YLR)
MIR ZAMAN — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent
| Citation | 2007 PLP 1822 (YLR) |
| Forum / Court | Peshawar |
| Bench Members | Ijaz-ul-Hassan Khan, J |
| Parties | MIR ZAMAN — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2007 PLP 1822 (YLR)?
This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2007 PLP 1822 (YLR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Peshawar bench comprising: Ijaz-ul-Hassan Khan, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2007 PLP 1822 (YLR) (MIR ZAMAN — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Representation
- Noor Alam Khan for Petitioner.
- 3. Mr. Noor Alam Khan, Advocate for the petitioner contended that it is a case of false plantation of Charas because no one would ordinarily stand on thoroughfare and publically sell narcotics. He contended that two police witnesses i.e. Raees Khan and Rahat do not corroborate the complainant's version. It was submitted that the Chemical Examiner opined that the samples in question were subjected to chemical analysis and all were found to be Charas, while two type of Charas i.e. 'pukhta' and 'garda' were sent to FSL. It was lastly contended that the petitioner is previous non-convict and is not involved in any other case. Reliance has been placed on Inayatullah v. State (2006 PCr.LJ 840), Aamir v. State (1973 PCr.LJ 205), and unreported judgments of this Court in Criminal Miscellaneous No.209 of 2005 and Criminal Miscellaneous No.508 of 2004.
- 4. Mr. Aurangzeb Khan, Advocate, appearing for the State, unsuccessfully. controverted the arguments of learned counsel for the petitioner.
Judgment & Decree
IJAZ-UL-HASSAN KHAN, J.--Mir Zaman, petitioner, charged in case F.I.R. No.20 dated 7-1-2007, registered at Police Station Tehkal, Peshawar, under section 9 of the Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997, after having failed to obtain bail from the Court of Additional Sessions Judge, Peshawar, has filed instant application for his release on bail.
2. Succinctly stated the facts of the case are, that on 7-1-2007, on prior information about indulgence of Mir Zaman, petitioner, in selling of Charas, Rajab Ali Khan, S.H.O. Police Station Tehkal, along with police party, while on patrol duty, apprehended the petitioner at the place of occurrence, having a black shopping bag in his hand, containing five packets one kilo gram each 'pukhta Charas' and 20 'purls garda Charas' weighing 200 grams. Four grams each were separated and sent to FSL for chemical analysis.
3. Mr. Noor Alam Khan, Advocate for the petitioner contended that it is a case of false plantation of Charas because no one would ordinarily stand on thoroughfare and publically sell narcotics. He contended that two police witnesses i.e. Raees Khan and Rahat do not corroborate the complainant's version. It was submitted that the Chemical Examiner opined that the samples in question were subjected to chemical analysis and all were found to be Charas, while two type of Charas i.e. 'pukhta' and 'garda' were sent to FSL. It was lastly contended that the petitioner is previous non-convict and is not involved in any other case. Reliance has been placed on Inayatullah v. State (2006 PCr.LJ 840), Aamir v. State (1973 PCr.LJ 205), and unreported judgments of this Court in Criminal Miscellaneous No.209 of 2005 and Criminal Miscellaneous No.508 of 2004.
4. Mr. Aurangzeb Khan, Advocate, appearing for the State, unsuccessfully. controverted the arguments of learned counsel for the petitioner.
5. Two parcels were sent to FSL for chemical examination and both have been opined to be Charas but without specifying which one of the parcel was Charas and in consolidated form and which parcel was containing 'garda Charas'. Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of this case and because of no previous involvement of the petitioner in the offence of nature for which he is now charged, this bail application is allowed and the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail in case he furnished bail bonds in the sum of Rs.3,00,000 with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of Illaqa Judicial Magistrate, who shall see that the sureties are local and men of means. H.B.T./96/P???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? Bail granted.