' CH. MAHMOOD AKHTAR KHAN, J.--- Allegation against the petitioner levelled in the case F.I.R No,35 dated 17-1-2009 under Articles 3/4 of Prohibition (Enforcement of Hadd) Order, 1979 Police Station Airport Rawalpindi is that on 17-1-2009 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 Investigating Officer apprehended accused petitioner when he was having two Toras in his possession. Each Tora contained 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 bailable. 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 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 Article 4 of Prohibition (Enforcement of Hadd) Order, 1979 but also under Article 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 petitioner but specimen for determination of nature of contents was obtained out of two bottles.
' Moreover there is no evidence with regard to the offence under Article 3 of Prohibition (Enforcement of Hadd) Order, 1979 and offence under Article 4 of the said Order is bailable.
Petitioner is previously non-convict and his detention behind the bars was no more required for any useful purpose for the decision of the case, therefore, petitioner is admitted to bail subject to furnishing bail bond in the sum Rs,50,000 with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of trial Court.