2003 PLP 1236 (MLD)
SHAH NAWAZ THAHEEM — Applicant Versus THE STATE — Respondent
| Citation | 2003 PLP 1236 (MLD) |
| Forum / Court | Karachi |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | SHAH NAWAZ THAHEEM — Applicant Versus THE STATE — Respondent |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2003 PLP 1236 (MLD)?
This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2003 PLP 1236 (MLD)?
The case was heard and decided by the Karachi bench comprising: N/A.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2003 PLP 1236 (MLD) (SHAH NAWAZ THAHEEM — Applicant Versus THE STATE — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Headnotes / Summary
S. 497
Control of Narcotic Substances Act (XXV of 1997), S.9(b)
Charas weighing 400 grams was allegedly recovered from the accused
Maximum punishment for the alleged offence was seven years as provided under S.9(b) of Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997
Case against the accused not falling within prohibitory clause of S.497, Cr.P.C., detention of the accused during the trial was not warranted
Judgment & Decree
Gul Muhammad v. The State 2000 PCr.LJ 551 and Tariq Bashir v. The State PLD 1995 SC 34 ref. Shafi Muhammad Memon for Applicant. Anwar Ansari for A.A.-G. for the State. The applicant Shah Nawaz is facing his trial for the offence under section 9(b) Control of Narcotic Substances Act, before the Special Judge under CNS Act, Dadu on alleged recovery of 400 grams of Charas on 17-4-2002 at 1430 hours near Punj-More Dita within the jurisdiction of Police Station Dadu. The bail application moved on behalf of the applicant was dismissed by the Trial Court by order dated 31-8-2002, hence the present application for bail pending trial. We have heard the learned counsel for the applicant and learned counsel for the State. The latter has opposed the grant of bail on the ground that 400 grams of Charas was secured from the possession of applicant. The report of Chemical Analyser is in positive. Learned counsel for the applicant has contended before us that maximum punishment is seven years for the offence under section 9(b) of the Act, therefore, the case does not fall within the prohibitory clause, to support his contention, he referred the case of Gul Muhammad v. The State (2000 PCr.LJ 551) where in the applicant from whose possession Charas weighing 530 grams was recovered, was granted bail by the Division Bench of this Court, on the analogy of Tariq Bashir N. The State (PLD 1995 Supreme Court 34) that grant of bail in cases covered by non-prohibitory clause is a rule whereas refusal is an exception. We have considered the contention of learned counsel. The Charas weighing 400 grams was secured Maximum punishment for the alleged offence is seven years under section 9(b). Therefore, we are of the view that the detention of the applicant during the trial, in these circumstances, is not warranted, as such we grant bail to the applicant subject to his furnishing security in the sum of Rs.50,000. (Rupees Fifty Thousands) with P.R. Bound in the like amount to the satisfaction of trial Court. H.B.T./S-635/K Bail granted.