2008 P Cr (PLP)
DILDAR — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent
| Citation | 2008 P Cr (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | DILDAR — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2008 P Cr (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 2008 P Cr (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: N/A.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2008 P Cr (PLP) (DILDAR — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Naseem Ullah Khan Niazi for Petitioner.
Headnotes / Summary
S. 497
Control of Narcotic Substances Act (XXV of 1997), S.9(b)
Accused was a petty street hawker and was addict of Charas, but had no criminal history to his credit as he was not earlier involved in any such case
Meagre quantity of Charas weighing 140 grams allegedly recovered from accused, would not make him trafficker/transporter of narcotics and he being himself an addict, must have kept such quantity for his own consumption
No allegation of sale of Charas by accused was levelled as no purchaser was arrested by the police along with him
Accused remained on physical remand, but nothing except said referred Charas was recovered from him
Person of accused was no more needed for investigation purposes and his further detention would not advance prosecution case any more
Offence charged was not covered by prohibitory clause of S.497, Cr.P.C.
Despite submission of challan trial of the case had not commenced and there was no probability of its conclusion in near future
In absence of any allegation of abscondence or tampering with the prosecution evidence by accused, bail was not to be withheld as of punishment and he would face the sentence, if ultimately he was convicted by the Trial Court on conclusion of the case
Accused having made out a case for his post-arrest bail pending his trial, he was allowed bail.
Judgment & Decree
Petitioner was refused post-arrest bail by the learned Sessions Judge on 4-3-2006 in case vide F.I.R. No.30 dated 18-2-2006 under section 9(b) of the Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997; registered with Police Station Mitha Tiwana, District Khushab. He has now filed instant petition for the same relief.
2. Charge against the petitioner is that he was intercepted by the police patrol party and on search, Charas weighing 140 grams was recovered from his pocket. Petitioner was arrested and after remaining on physical remand has since been remitted to the judicial lock-up.
3. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have examined the police record. Undisputedly the petitioner is a petty street hawker and is addict of Charas but has no criminal history to his credit, as he was not earlier involved in any alike case. Meagre quantity of Charas weighing 140 grams allegedly recovered from the petitioner would not make him trafficker/transporter of narcotics and he himself being addict, must have kept such quantity for his own consumption. There is no allegation of sale of Charas by the petitioner as no purchaser was arrested by the police along him. Petitioner remained on physical remand but nothing except the above-referred Charas, was recovered from him. Person of the petitioner is 'no more needed for investigation purposes and his further detention would not advice prosecution case, any more. The offence charged' is not covered by prohibitory clause of section 497, Cr.P.C. In spite of submission of challan, trial of the case has not commenced and there is no probability of its conclusion in near future. In absence of any allegation of abscondence or tampering with the prosecution evidence by the petitioner, bail is not to be withheld as of punishment and he will face the sentence, if ultimately convicted by the Trial Court at the time of conclusion of the case.
4. For the reason noted above, petitioner has made out a case for his post-arrest bail in the case against him, pending its trial. This petition is accordingly allowed and the petitioner is admitted to bail subject to his furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs.20,000 with two sureties, each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court. H.B.T./D-12/L Bail granted.