' KHAWAJA MUHAMMAD SHARIF, J.---This is an appeal against the summoning order so the delay is condoned.
2. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that appeal under section 48 of the Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997 is maintainable. He further submits that both the petitioners were got discharged by the Investigating Officer himself and that without recording any evidence, the learned trial Court while referring to a bail matter of the co-accused has ordered for summoning of the respondents. Reliance has been placed on "Muhammad Ibrahim and others v. Qudrat Ullah Ruddy and others" PLD 1986 Lah. 256 and unreported judgment delivered in Appeal/Revision No.1889 of 2002 titled "Muhammad Asim Lahore v. State". Learned counsel further submits that in the unreported judgment circumstances were of similar nature as that of the present case.
3. Mr. M. Bilal Khan, Additional Advocate-General and Legal Advisor of Anti-Narcotics Force concedes the submissions made by the learned counsel for the appellants and submit that if after recording evidence of P.Ws., the learned trial Court comes to the conclusion that sufficient material is available on record, then it is empowered to summon them.
4. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and having gone through the two judgments noted (supra), we accept this appeal and set aside the impugned order dated 9-10-2002. The appellants are behind the bars. They shall be released from jail, if not required in any other criminal case.