2007 PLP 1026 (YLR)
MUHAMMAD ISHAQUE — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent
| Citation | 2007 PLP 1026 (YLR) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | Khawaja Muhammad Sharif and M.A. Shahid Siddiqui, JJ |
| Parties | MUHAMMAD ISHAQUE — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2007 PLP 1026 (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 2007 PLP 1026 (YLR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Khawaja Muhammad Sharif and M.A. Shahid Siddiqui, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2007 PLP 1026 (YLR) (MUHAMMAD ISHAQUE — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Ch. Qamar Shahid for Petitioner.
- The learned counsel for petitioner in support of this petition submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case; he is sixty one years of age and behind the bars for the last 7 months. The learned counsel further contends that a quantity of 250 grams of post was recovered from petitioner, which was sent to the Chemical Examiner, who reported that it contained .0816 % of narcotic/Morphine, hence the petitioner is entitled to bail.
Headnotes / Summary
S. 497
Control of Narcotic Substances Act (XXV of 1997), Ss. 6 & 9
Contention of accused was that a quantity of 250 grams of `Post' was recovered from him which was sent to Chemical Examiner who reported that it contained 0.0816% of narcotic/Morphine' and that he was entitled to bail
Held, there was no need for ascertaining the quantity of narcotic in the `Post' which was sent to Chemical Examiner as `Post' itself was narcotic substance
Prima facie, accused being involved in a case falling within the prohibitory clause of S.497, Cr.P.C., he was not entitled to concession of bail. Khalil Ahmad v. State PLD 2005 Lah.440 ref. Ch. Nazir Ahmad for the State. Ch. Muhammad Sharif (CC No.1555). for A.N.F.
Judgment & Decree
The learned counsel for petitioner in support of this petition submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case; he is sixty one years of age and behind the bars for the last 7 months. The learned counsel further contends that a quantity of 250 grams of post was recovered from petitioner, which was sent to the Chemical Examiner, who reported that it contained .0816 % of narcotic/Morphine, hence the petitioner is entitled to bail.
2. On the other hand the learned counsel for A.N.F. submits that according to Full Bench judgment of this Court in case Khalil Ahmad v. State PLD 2005 Lahore 440 specially Heading (F) there is no need for ascertaining the quantity of narcotic in the post, which is sent to Chemical Examiner. It has been held that the post is itself narcotic substance. In this view of the matter, prima facie, the petitioner is involved in the case falling within the prohibitory clause. He is, therefore, not entitled to the concession of bail. This petition is dismissed. H.B.T./M-91/L Bail refused.