Allegation against the petitioner leveled in the case FIR No, 35 dated 17.1.2.2009 under Section 3/4 of Prohibition (Enforcement of Hadd) Order, 1979 Police Station Airport Rawalpindi is that on 7.1.2009 at about 10.50 p.m. in the area of Suzuki Stand Gharibabad within the jurisdiction of Police Station Airport Rawalpindi on the spy information I.O. apprehended accused petitioner when he was having two Toras in his possession. Each Tora contains 30 bottles of liquor. Investigating Officer obtained small quantity of contents in bottle for determination of its nature only from two bottles each from one Tora. and after investigation he was sent to judicial lock-up.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that there is no evidence of Section 3 of Prohibition (Enforcement of Hadd) Order, 1979 and that Section 4 of the said Ordinance is bail able. He further contended that specimen for determination of nature of contents in the bottles was obtained only from two bottles out of 60 bottles. Lastly contended that offence under which the petitioner is charged does not fall within the prohibitory clause of Section 497 Cr.P.C.
3. Learned D.P.G vehemently contested the contentions raised by learned counsel for the petitioner and argued that heavy quantity of liquor was recovered from the possession of the petitioner and presumably that huge quantity with the petitioner was for the purpose of transportation and sale and thus he is fully connected with the commission of offence not only under Section 4 of Prohibition (Enforcement of Hadd) Order, 1979 but also u/S. 3 of Prohibition (Enforcement of Hadd)
Order, 1979.
4. Arguments heard. Record perused. No doubt allegedly 60 bottles of liquor was recovered from the possession of the petitioner but specimen for determination of nature of contents was obtained out of two bottles. More over there is no evidence with regard to the offence u/S. 3 of Prohibition (Enforcement of Hadd) Order. 1979 and offence under Section 4 of the said Ordinance is bail able. Petitioner is previously non-convict and his detention behind the bar was no more required for any useful purpose for the decision of the case, therefore, petitioner is admitted to bail in the subject to furnishing bail bond in the sum Rs, 50,000/- with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of trial Court.