' MUHAMMAD SAFDAR KHAN SIKANDRI, J.-The jurisdiction of this Court has been invoked by the accused- petitioner Akbar Ali for securing post- arrest bail in case F.I.R. No, 613 dated 9-2009 registered under section 9 Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997 at Police Station Nuarang, District Lakki Marwat.
2. While on routine patrol (gasht), local police of Police Statoin Naurang received the information about the selling of narcotics (charas) by the accused- petitioner on motorbike in Naurang Bazar and eventually present at Manjiwala Road. Accordingly the police intercepted him along with contraband wrapped in plastic shopper and upon weighment, the charas came out to 1030 grams, out of which four grams were separated for analysis in the F.S.L.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the recovery of contraband is planted against the petitioner but in fact he is innocent and falsely involved in the instant case. He urged before me that no F.S.L, report is available on the file which could show that the substance recovered from possession of the petitioner is charas or otherwise which requires further probe. Learned counsel relied on 2005 PCr.LJ 345 Peshawar and 2008 PCr.LJ 1449.
4. Learned State Counsel controverted the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the petitioner and argued that the quantity seized from possession of the petitioner exceeds one thousand gram and comes under the prohibitory clause of section 497, Cr.P.C. He contended that prima facie case exists against the petitioner being involved in a case of heinous nature and dangerous for society especially for young generation and as such not entitled to bail.
5. I gave my considered thought to the arguments and meticulously gone through the material available on record and am of the opinion in view of Dila Baz Khan's case reported in 2008 PCr.LJ 1437 Peshawar that the quantity of the alleged recovered material i.e, charas marginally exceeded from 1000 grams and it was a border line case between clauses (b) & (c) of section 9 Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997, where maximum punishment could not be awarded, even if the charge was established and accordingly this Court had extended the bail to the petitioner.
6. Similar view is taken by this Court in yet another case wherein the accused- petitioner was admitted to bail. Reference can be made to 2005 PCr.LJ 345 Peshawar.
7. As the prosecution has not yet collected independent evidence to connect the accused- petitioner with the guilt, rather the FSL report is still awaited, therefore, it makes the case against the petitioner one of further inquiry under the contemplation of subsection (2) of section 497, Cr.P.C.
8. In view of the aforementioned reasons, I am constrained to accept this petition and enlarge the petitioner on bail subject to his furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs,2,00,000 (Rupees two lac) with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of Illaqa/Duty Judicial Magistrate. The learned Magistrate to ensure that the sureties are the men of ways and means and local.