2013 PLP 1703 (MLD)

SHAH JEHAN KHAN AKHUNDZADA, J.

Petitioner Sher Rehman facing the charge in case F.I.R. No. 319 dated 19-3-2013 registered at Police Station, Pahari Pura Peshawar under section 9(c) Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997 was refused bail by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-XIV, Peshawar. Now he has moved this petition for his release on bail.

2. The brief facts of the case are that on 19-3-2013 at 12.25 hours Rehmatullah S.H.O. along with his police contingents was present in Hani Camp Adda Torkham Stand, when on the pointation of an informer a Motor Car bearing registration No.8986/LOK was stopped and its driver disclosed his name as Sher Rehman son of Gul Man resident of Regi Lalma. On personal search of the accused nothing indiscriminating recovered but on search of the vehicle the police recovered three packets of Charas from beneath the driver seat weighing three Kilograms and taken it into possession. He was arrested on the spot and present case was registered against him.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that no recovery of contraband Charas was made from the personal and immediate possession of the accused-petitioner but the same was alleged to have been recovered from the vehicle. He further submitted that the accused-petitioner is neither a previous convict nor involved in such like offence and this Court in similar cases up to recovery of four Kilograms contraband has consistently allowed bail to accused keeping in view the quantity of contraband recovered, therefore, the petitioner is also entitled to the concession of bail.

4. Learned State counsel opposed the bail to the petitioner on the ground that three Kilograms Charas has been recovered from the immediate possession of the petitioner and FSL report in respect of the contraband is also in positive, therefore, the petitioner is not entitled to the concession of bail as the offence is covered by the prohibitory clause of section 497, Cr.P.C.

5. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and going through the record of the case I have come to the conclusion that it is the consistent view of this Court that for the purpose of bail in such like offences the quantity of contraband and the expected quantum of punishment to be awarded at the trial has to be taken into account while allowing bail to the accused persons. As punishment for contraband of less than ten kilograms is up to fourteen years, therefore, keeping in view the recovered contraband the petitioner is not likely to be awarded punishment for more than two years and the petitioner has joined the investigation and is no more required to the Investigating Agency. He is also neither a previous convict nor involved in such like offences.

6. Resultantly, this bail application is accepted and the accused-petitioner is allowed bail on furnishing bail bond in the sum of Rs.1,00,000 (Rupees One Lac) with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of Illeqa/Judicial Magistrate. MWA/326/P Bail granted.