2018 PLP 971 (MLD)

MALIK HAQ NAWAZ, J.

The petitioner has been booked under section 9(c) of CNSA, 1997, vide FIR No. 06/2016 dated 04-05-2016 registered at Police Station ANF Gilgit.

2. The brief facts of the instant case have been reflected in Para No. 2 of the judgment of learned Special Judge, Gilgit dated 27-08-2016. Para No. 2 of the judgment is reproduced as under:-- "Briefly stated the facts of the connected case against the accused/petitioner are that on 04-05-2016 at 0540 hours Inspector Muhammad Sharif, incharge, ANF Check post, Sost was present on his duty along with his staff when he received spy telephonic information that one Muhammad Nabi is present with huge quantity of Chars at the PSO Petrol Pump Sost waiting for customer and if prompt action is taken recovery is accepted. On receipt of the information he along with a team of ANF personnel reached at the spot and found the accused carrying a white floor bag in his hand. They overpowered him. The people available there excused to become witnesses as such he checked the bag making HC Wazir Khan and HC Nizamuddin of ANF as witnesses and found 08 packets wrapped in solution tape containing 1000 grams of fine quality chars (garda) each. The total quantity of chars was 8000 grams. He took in possession the contraband cannabis resin and after separating samples from each packet prepared sealed parcels and submitted murasila for registration of FIR. Accordingly, Sub-Inspector Muhammad Ali Khokhar, SHO Police Station, ANF, Gilgit chalked-out FIR No. 05/2016 dated 04-05-2016 under section 9(c) of CNSA."

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits the case in hand is false and the petitioner has been made a scapegoat. The learned counsel further submitted that mandatory provision of section 103, Cr.P.C. have been violated without any legal justification. The prosecution as evident from the contents of FIR was having prior information regarding the presence of accused near PSO Pump Sost, but they did not associate any independent private witness. The case of the petitioner is one of the further inquiry and petitioner may be admitted to bail. The learned counsel for the petitioner relied on 2012 PCr.LJ 1910, 2016 MLD 1054, 2010 SCMR 1160, 2012 SCMR 573 and PLD 1997 SC 408, in support of above contentions.

4. On the other hand the learned Special Prosecutor for ANF rebutted the arguments advanced by the counsel for the petitioner and submitted that the provisions of section 103, Cr.P.C. have expressly been excluded by virtue of section 25 of CNSA 1997. Further submitted that petitioner/accused is a habitual drug peddler as on 08-02-2016, an FIR bearing No.15/16 under section 9(c) was registered against the accused at Police Station City Gilgit. The petitioner was released on bail on account of some technical lapses as the case was registered by the local Police instead of ANF. Special prosecutor forcefully contended that the petitioner misused the concession of bail as such he is not entitled for any discretionary relief. He relied on 2010 PCr.LJ 292, 2010 SCMR 61 and 2012 PCr.LJ 402 in support of his contentions.

5. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and found that the accused was caught red-handed and huge quantity of Chars weighing 8000 grams was recovered from his possession which cannot be planted falsely. The accused as evident from the record is a habitual offender and the concession of bail though discretionary cannot be exercised in favour of such type of criminals, as they cannot let loose on the society to continue their nefarious activities. The result of above discussions is that the petitioner is not entitled for the grant of bail which is dismissed accordingly. WA/146/GB Bail declined.