The petitioner namely Tariq through instant petition, seeks his release on post-arrest bail in case FIR No, 335 dated 19.08.2016 registered under Section 9(c) of The Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997 (hereinafter referred "CNSA, 1997"), at P.S. Rangpura District Sialkot.
2. As per allegations contained in the FIR, Charas weighing 1230 grams was recovered from the possession of the petitioner.
3. Heard. Record perused.
4. The petitioner was apprehended by the police on the basis of spy information and Charas weighing 1230 grams wrapped in polythene bag was allegedly recovered from his possession.
Though the alleged recovery apparently falls under Section 9(c) of CNSA, 1997 but only 230 grams exceeds the maximum limit as prescribed under Section 9(b) of CNSA, 1997 to bring the case of the petitioner within the mischief of Section 9(b) of Act ibid. It has been mentioned in the FIR that the Charas was wrapped in a shopper at the time of alleged recovery. It is not clear from the contents of FIR, as to whether the weight of the recovered substance was conducted with or without the same. This aspect can only be determined by the learned trial Court at the time of recording of evidence. The case of the petitioner thus, qua the attraction of Section 9(c) of CNSA, 1997 requires further inquiry and probe within the contemplation of Section 497(2) of The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898.
5. The case was registered on 19th August, 2016 and till date, report of Chemical Examiner is awaited and in absence of said report, the prosecution is not in possession of concrete evidence to determine with certainty that the alleged recovered substance is actually a narcotic drug, attracting penal provisions contained in Section 9 of CNSA, 1997.
6. Mere registration of one criminal case of such nature without any conviction would not dis entitle the petitioner from concession of bail. Reliance is placed on the case of "Jamal-ud-Din alias Zubair Khan Vs. The State" (2012 SCM R 573). The petitioner was arrested on 19th August, 2016 and still awaiting his trial, the conclusion of which is not in sight in near future. Thus keeping the petitioner behind the bars for an indefinite period would serve no useful purpose. In our humble view, bar contained in Section 51 of CNSA, 1997 is apparently not attracted to the instant case.
7. For what has been discussed above, we are inclined to allow the instant petition and enlarge the petitioner Tariq on post-arrest bail subject to furnishing his bail bonds in the sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- (Rs. One lac only) with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of learned trial Court.
8. Needless to observe that the observations made herein above are only tentative in their nature and are strictly confined to the extent of grant of instant bail.