PLD 2017

P L D 2017 Peshawar 21 (PLP)

Mst. SHAH SANAM alias SHEMA — Petitioner Versus The STATE — Respondent

Jurisdiction / Court
High Court
Decided Date
2016-May-13
Honorable Judges
N/A
Case Reference Summary (AEO Optimized)
Citation P L D 2017 Peshawar 21 (PLP)
Forum / Court High Court
Bench Members N/A
Parties Mst. SHAH SANAM alias SHEMA — Petitioner Versus The STATE — Respondent
Primary Law Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)
💡 Quick Legal QA & Summary / سوال و جواب خلاصہ
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in P L D 2017 Peshawar 21 (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 P L D 2017 Peshawar 21 (PLP)?

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

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

Cite this legal precedent as: P L D 2017 Peshawar 21 (PLP) (Mst. SHAH SANAM alias SHEMA — Petitioner Versus The STATE — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.

Laws Cited

Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)

Representation

  • Farhat Ullah Khan for Petitioner.

Headnotes / Summary

S.497

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

Possessing and trafficking narcotics

Bail, refusal of

Counsel for accused pleaded that accused lady, could be granted bail, as she was a widow, and she had remained in judicial lock-up for the last two months

Plea, was repelled in view of the recovery of huge quantity of contraband charas from the direct personal possession of accused

Offence for which accused was charged squarely fell within the restrictive limb of S.497, Cr.P.C.

Mere womanhood or widowhood, was no good ground to enlarge accused on bail in such like cases and that too, when the smuggling of narcotics through ladies and minors had become a common phenomenon

Accused, prima facie linked with the commission of offence, was disentitled to bail

Bail petition being bereft of any merits, stood dismissed, in circumstances.

Judgment & Decree

QAISER RASHID KHAN, J.

The accused-petitioner Mst. Shah Sanam, seeks bail in case FIR No. 159 dated 08.03.2016, registered under section 9(c), Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997, Police Station Risalpur, Nowshera after being declined the said relief by the learned court below.

2. The allegations against the accused/petitioner are that 4090 grams charas were recovered from her personal possession, hence the FIR ibid. Arguments heard and available record perused.

3. As is evident from the FIR, it was on a tip off regarding the smuggling of contraband charas through Alto Motor Car bearing registration No. LRG-9792, when a nakabandi was laid by the police and on the arrival of the motor car at the spot, the same was stopped. The driver disclosed his name as Anwar Khan, the person occupying the rear seat as Muhammad Saleem while the lady occupying the rear seat identified herself as Mst. Shah Sanam. The body search of the latter through a lady constable revealed four packets of charas tied down to her body with solution tape, which on weighment came out to be 4090 grams.

4. All that the learned counsel for the petitioner pleaded was that the petitioner is a lady and a widow and she has remained in judicial lock up for the last two months. I am afraid, such arguments carry little weight in view of the recovery of huge quantity of contraband charas from the direct personal possession of the petitioner coupled with the fact that the offence for which the petitioner is charged squarely falls within the restrictive limb of section 497, Cr.P.C. Mere womanhood or widowhood is no good ground to enlarge the accused/petitioner on bail in such like cases and that too, when the smuggling of narcotics through ladies and minors has, of late, become a common phenomenon. Being prima facie linked with the commission of the offence, I hold the accused/petitioner disentitled to bail. The petition being bereft of any merits, stands dismissed accordingly.

5. Before parting with this order, it is directed that any observations recorded in this order, being purely tentative in nature, should in no way prejudice the proceedings before the learned trial court where the case be decided strictly on its own merits after recording evidence. HBT/222/P Bail refused.