2006 PLP 3095 (YLR)
MUHAMMAD RAMZAN — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent
| Citation | 2006 PLP 3095 (YLR) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | Asif Saeed Khan Khosa and Ijaz Ahmad Chaudhry, JJ |
| Parties | MUHAMMAD RAMZAN — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2006 PLP 3095 (YLR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2006 PLP 3095 (YLR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Asif Saeed Khan Khosa and Ijaz Ahmad Chaudhry, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2006 PLP 3095 (YLR) (MUHAMMAD RAMZAN — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Ahmad Baksh Bharwana for Petitioner.
Headnotes / Summary
Ss. 497(2) & 561-A
Control of Narcotic Substances Act (XXV of 1997), Ss.9(c), 15 & 51(1)
Prosecution's own case was that no narcotic substance had been recovered from physical possession of the accused
Nothing was available on record to establish that amount recovered from possession of accused, was sale proceeds of any narcotic substance
Question regarding complicity of accused with co-accused required further probe
Challan had already been submitted before the Trial Court after completion of investigation
Physical custody of accused, in circumstances, was not required for the purpose of investigation
Concession of bail, ought not to be withheld by way of premature punishment
Offence under S.9(c) of Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997, though entailed a punishment of death and by virtue of provisions of S.51(1) of said Act, bail could not be granted in such a case, but in an appropriate case bail could be granted to an accused in such a case by invoking provisions of S.561-A, Cr. P. C.
Present case warranted admission of accused to bail
Accused was admitted to bail, in circumstances. Gul Zaman v. The State 1999 SCMR 1271 and The State through Deputy Director, Anti-Narcotic Force, Karachi v. Syed Abdul Qayyum 2001 SCMR 14 ref. Muhammad Afzal Butt for the State.
Judgment & Decree
ASIF SAEED KHAN KHOSA, J.
Through this petition Muhammad Ramzan petitioner has sought post-arrest bail in case F.I.R. No.115 registered at Police Station Ahmedpur Sial, District Jhang on 21-7-2005 in respect of an offence under section 9(c) read with section 15 of the Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997.
2. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and going through the record we have straightaway observed that even according to the prosecution's own case no narcotic substance had been recovered from the petitioner's physical possession. Although a sum of Rs.6,200 had allegedly been recovered from the petitioner's possession at the time of the alleged raid yet there is nothing available on the record of investigation to establish that the said sum of money was in fact the sale proceeds of sale of any narcotic substance. In the circumstances of this case the question regarding complicity of the petitioner with his co-accused requires further probe at this stage as there is no material available on the record so far to establish such community of interest between the petitioner and his co-accused. After completion of the investigation a challan has already been submitted before the learned trial Court and, thus, physical custody of the petitioner is not required at this stage for the purpose of investigation. It is trite that the concession of bail ought not to be withheld by way of premature punishment. It may be true that an offence under section 9(c) of Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997 entails a punishment of death and by virtue of the provisions of section 51(1) of the said Act of 1997 bail cannot be granted in such a case yet it had been held by the Honourable Supreme Court of Pakistan in the cases of Gul Zaman v. The State (1999 SCMR 1271) and The State through Deputy Director, Anti-Narcotic Force, Karachi v. Syed Abdul Qayyum (2001 SCMR 14) that in an appropriate case bail can be granted to an accused person in such a case by invoking the provisions of section 561-A, Cr.P.C. We have found the case in hand to be such a case warranting admission of the petitioner to bail. This petition is, therefore, allowed and the petitioner is admitted to bail subject to furnishing bail bond in the sum of Rs.1,00,000 (Rupees one hundred thousand only) with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court. H.B.T./M-404/L????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? Bail granted.