1999 P Cr (PLP)
MUHAMMAD YOUNIS‑‑‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑‑‑Respondent.
| Citation | 1999 P Cr (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Peshawar |
| Bench Members | Jawaid Nawaz Khan Gandapur, J |
| Parties | MUHAMMAD YOUNIS‑‑‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑‑‑Respondent. |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)‑‑‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1999 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 1999 P Cr (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the Peshawar bench comprising: Jawaid Nawaz Khan Gandapur, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1999 P Cr (PLP) (MUHAMMAD YOUNIS‑‑‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑‑‑Respondent.). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Farooq Masood Ahmad for Petitioner.
- Date of hearing: 7thDecember, 1998.
Headnotes / Summary
‑‑‑‑S. 497‑‑‑Prohibition (Enforcement of Hadd) Order (4 of 1979), Art.3/4‑‑ Bail, grant of‑‑‑Despite 20 grams of heroin having been allegedly recovered from the possession of accused in broad daylight in the presence of lot of people, police did not join any of them in the recovery proceedings, nor had made any effort in this regard ‑‑‑F.I.R. had a cutting/overwriting regarding the weight of said heroin‑‑‑Record did not show that the recovered material was sent to Chemical Examiner for analysis, nor any‑report in this behalf was available on the file‑‑‑Reasonable grounds, thus, did not exist for believing that the accused was connected with the commission of the offence with which he was charged‑‑ Bail was allowed to accused accordingly. S. Saeed Hassan Sherazi, Asstt. A.‑G. for the State.
Judgment & Decree
Date of hearing: 7thDecember, 1998. The petitioner, Muhammad Younus, stands charged for having committed an offence punishable under Article 3/4 of Prohibition (Enforcement of Hadd) Order, 1979, vide F.I.R. No.187, dated 29‑8‑1998, registered at Police Station Saddar, Tehsil and District D.I. Khan. According to the prosecution, heroin powder, weighing 20 grams, was recovered from the possession of the petitioner by the D.F.C. namely, Manzoor Ahmad.
2. Mr. Farooq Masood Ahmad, Advocate, learned counsel for the petitioner and Syed Saeed Hassan Sherazi, learned Assistant Advocate‑General for the State present and heard. Record of the case perused with some degree of care.
3. Admittedly, the occurrence took place in broad daylight at a place where lot of people were present. However, the police failed to associate anyone of them with the recovery process. Beside this there is nothing on the file to suggest, even remotely, that the police officials, who had allegedly recovered the heroin powder from the possession of the accused/petitioner, had made any effort to persuade or request the people present on the scene of occurrence, to witness the recovery process and that they had refused to oblige the police. Resultantly, I am of the considered view that the alleged recovery of 20 grams of heroin powder from the possession of the petitioner has become doubtful especially when there is a cutting/overwriting in the F.I.R. with regard to the weight of the heroin powder.
4. Additionally, the learned Assistant Advocate‑General has admitted at the Bar and rightly so that there is nothing on the police/judicial file to show ash to whether or not the "contraband narcotics" was sent for chemical analysis. He further, admitted that the chemical analysis report, if any, is not available on the police/judicial file to establish, prima facie, that the item recovered from the possession of the petitioner was heroin powder.
5. In the circumstances, I am of the view that reasonable grounds do not exist for believing that the petitioner is connected with the commission of offence charged with. Consequently, the petitioner is admitted to bail.
6. He shall be released forthwith provided he furnishes bail bonds in the sum of Rs.50,000 (Rupees fifty thousands) with two sureties, each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Additional Registrar of this Court.
7. The Additional Registrar shall see that the sureties are respectable persons, hail from the settled area of N.‑W.F.P. and are men of means having sufficient property in their names. The Additional Registrar shall obtain the copies of the property documents/National Identity Cards of the sureties and place the same on this file for record. N.H.Q/295/P Bail allowed.