PCRLJ 2013

2013 P Cr (PLP)

GULAB DIN — Petitioner Versus The STATE — Respondent

Jurisdiction / Court
Peshawar
Decided Date
2012-June-1
Honorable Judges
N/A
Case Reference Summary (AEO Optimized)
Citation 2013 P Cr (PLP)
Forum / Court Peshawar
Bench Members N/A
Parties GULAB DIN — Petitioner Versus The STATE — Respondent
Primary Law (b) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), (a) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)
💡 Quick Legal QA & Summary / سوال و جواب خلاصہ
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2013 P Cr (PLP)?

This judgment primarily cites: (b) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), (a) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.

Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2013 P Cr (PLP)?

The case was heard and decided by the Peshawar bench comprising: N/A.

Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?

Cite this legal precedent as: 2013 P Cr (PLP) (GULAB DIN — Petitioner Versus The STATE — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.

Laws Cited

(b) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) (a) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)

Representation

  • Noor Alam Khan for Petitioner.

Headnotes / Summary

S. 497(2)

Control of Narcotic Substances Act (XXV of 1997), S.9(c)

Possession and trafficking of narcotics

Bail, grant of

Further inquiry

Co-accused already released on bail

Rule of consistency

Applicability

Conscious knowledge of presence of narcotics

Scope

Charas weighing 9645 grams was allegedly recovered from a vehicle which was being driven by the accused

Co-accused had already been granted bail

Mere presence of accused in driving seat did not prima facie, establish his involvement or his conscious knowledge regarding presence of narcotics

Case was one of further inquiry

Accused was released on bail in circumstances.

S. 497

Control of Narcotic Substances Act (XXV of 1997), S. 9

Bail

Narcotics recovered from vehicle being driven by the accused

Conscious knowledge of accused regarding presence of narcotics

Scope

Mere presence of accused in the driving seat of the vehicle would not prima facie, establish his involvement or his conscious knowledge regarding presence of narcotics.

Judgment & Decree

ATTAULLAH KHAN, J.

Gulab Din, petitioner herein, who is charged in a case registered against him and another under section 9(c) of the Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997, vide F.I.R. No.211, dated 4-4-2012 in Police Station Saro Kallay, Charsadda, sought his release on bail on the grounds that he was falsely involved in the instant case by the local police due to some ulterior motives; that neither he was in conscious knowledge of the incriminating substance nor the vehicle, wherefrom, the same was recovered belonging to him; that he is not likely to be awarded the maximum sentence provided by the statute for possessing 9645 grams of "Charas" and that his co-accused has already been released on bail by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Shaqadar vide order dated 13-4-2012, therefore, he is also held entitled to the concession of bail on the principle of consistency. Reliance was placed on the judgments of Ghani -ur-Rehman v. State (2009 SCMR 954) and unreported judgment of this Court dated 17-9-2010, rendered in Criminal Miscellaneous (BA) No.1197 of 2010.

2. As against the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State opposed the grant of bail to the petitioner by submitting that the petitioner was arrested red-handed on the spot, when he was driving the vehicle, wherefrom, the huge quantity of incriminating substance was recovered; that the FSL report is positive; that he also claimed the ownership of the vehicle and that he being, prima facie, connected with a crime; attracting the prohibitory clause, doesn't deserve the concession of bail at this stage, even if it is presumed for a while that he is not likely to be awarded the maximum sentence provided by the statute.

3. I have gone through the record carefully and considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties.

4. I have minutely gone through the record and the judgments of the apex Court as well as of this Court and found that the facts of the instant case are similar in nature with those of the judgments, referred to above, whereby, the petitioners therein, had been released on bail. Even otherwise, mere presence of the petitioner in the driving seat of the truck would not, prima facie, establish his involvement or his conscious knowledge regarding presence of narcotics. No doubt, a huge quantity of 9645 grams of charas has been recovered but, in the given circumstances, that cannot be linked with the petitioner. No reasonable grounds appear to be there, which could reflect the involvement of the petitioner in the case and his such involvement would require further probe, which makes his case as that of further inquiry under section 497(2) of the Cr.P.C. entitling him to the concession of bail, that too, when his co-accused has already been released on bail by the learned Additional Session Judge, Shabqadar vide order dated 13-4-2012.

5. For the reasons discussed above, this petition is allowed and the petitioner is directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs. 2,00,000 (Rupees two lac) with two sureties, each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court, who is to ensure that the sureties are local, reliable and men of means. MWA/64/P Bail granted.