2019 P Cr (PLP)
SABIR HUSSAIN — Petitioner Versus The STATE — Respondent
| Citation | 2019 P Cr (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Gilgit-Baltistan Chief Court |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | SABIR HUSSAIN — Petitioner Versus The STATE — Respondent |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2019 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 2019 P Cr (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the Gilgit-Baltistan Chief Court bench comprising: N/A.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2019 P Cr (PLP) (SABIR HUSSAIN — Petitioner Versus The STATE — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Shahbaz Ali for Petitioner.
- Dy. Advocate-General for the State.
Headnotes / Summary
S. 497
Control of Narcotic Substances Act (XXV of 1997), S. 9(c)
Possession of charas weighing 2700 grams
Scope
Charas 'Garda' was not charas
Charas was extracted after baking/chemical process
Quantity of charas in "Garda" varied
Case of petitioner called for further inquiry
Petitioner was admitted to bail, in circumstances.
Judgment & Decree
MALIK HAQ NAWAZ, J.
ANF Police booked the petitioner in the offence under section 9(c), C.N.S.A., 1997 vide FIR No. 02/2019 dated 23-01-2019 registered at Police Station, ANF Gilgit.
2. Post arrest bail of the petitioner was refused by the learned vacation Judge Gilgit vide judgment/order dated 04-02-2019.
3. The petitioner has filed the instant petition for concession of bail on multiple grounds, which could be summarized as under: (i) The case is false and the petitioner has been falsely involved in the case. (ii) ANF Police was having spy information but did not associate any independent witness in the recovery proceedings. (iii) The charas "Garda" has been allegedly recovered from the possession of the petitioner, which does not come with the definition of "Narcotics". (iv) The petitioner is first offender, previous non convict and no more required for the purpose of investigations. (v) There is no chance that petitioner if released will either abscond or will tamper with the prosecution evidence. (vi) A very small quantity of narcotics has been sent to expert and even a positive report will not bring the case within the prohibitory clauses of section 497, Cr.P.C.
4. On the other hand the learned Special Prosecutor ANP vehemently opposed the petition and submitted that the petitioner was arrested by ANF official on a spy information and a huge quantity of charas "Garda" has been recovered from his possession. The cases under section 9(c) entails capital punishment and the petitioner is not entitled for concession of bail.
5. As alleged in the FIR, 2700 grams of charas "Garda" have been recovered from the possession of the petitioner. This Court in two earlier judgments passed in Cr. Misc. No.29/2018 titled Sher Muhammad v. The State and Cr. Misc. No.25/2019 titled Mazhar ul Haq v. The State have held that the charas "Garda" is not the charas and the charas is extracted after baking/chemical process and each and every stuff of charas "Garda" will vary about the quantity of charas, which will be extracted from the stuff, which brings the case of the petitioner within the ambit of further inquiry. The petitioner is admitted to bail subject to his furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs.10,0000/- (ten lac) with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of learned Judicial Magistrate/Sessions Judge at Gilgit. MQ/4-GB Bail granted.