Through the instant petition under Section 497 Cr.P.C., Nauman alias Noma the petitioner seeks his release on post-arrest bail in case FIR No.82 dated 20.02.2019 offence under Section 9(c) of the Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997 (" CNSA, 1997 ") registered at City Sahiwal, District Sahiwal.
2. As per contents of FIR, precisely , on 20.02.2019, when the complainant along with other police officials was on patrol duty, when he received a 'spy information that petitioner is selling charas in "Pull Bazar", and if a raid be conducted, he may be apprehended. Whereupon, he constituted a raiding party and conducted a raid. On the pointation of informer , he apprehended a person, who disclosed his name as Nauman alias Noma, the petitioner .
On his personal search., charas weighing 1265-grams were recovered from a black shopper which he carrying in his right hand alongwith sale proceed of Rs. 300.
3. Heard. Record perused.
4. According to the contents of the FIR, the petitioner was apprehended by the police and 1265-grams charas was allegedly recovered from his possession. Though the alleged recovery apparently falls under Section 9(c) of the CNSA, 1997 but slightly exceeds the I maximum limit as prescribed under Section 9(b) of the CNSA, 1997 to bring the case of the petitioner within the mischief of Section 9(c) of the CNSA, 1997. The recovered contraband was wrapped in a polythene shopper and at present, it is not clear as to whether the weight of the recovered substance was conducted with or without the same. Thus fact would be determined by the learned trial Court after recording of prosecution evidence that what was the net weight of alleged recovered narcotic and as to whether the case of the petitioner falls under Section 9 (b) or it comes under the ambit of Section 9(c) of the CNSA, 1997,
5. Another important aspect of the case is that the report of Government Analys t is still awaited, without which, nature, of recovered substance cannot be exactly determined. Therefore, these discrepancies jointly are sufficient to bring the case of the petitioner within the ambit of further inquiry as per contemplation of Section 497(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898. Mere leveling of allegations of heinous offence is not sufficient to keep the accused behind the bars. When once accused succeeds to establish that his case calls for further inquiry and probe, then rigors contained in Section 51 of the CNSA. 1997 would not be attracted.
6. The petitioner is first offender having no criminal antecedents. He is behind the bars since his arrest i.e.20.2.2019. The investigation of the case is complete and person of the petitioner is no more required by the police for the purpose of further investigation. The petitioner is still awaiting his trial, the conclusion of which is not in sight in near future, therefore, his further detention in jail would serve no useful purpose for the prosecution.
Accordingly , this petition is allowed and petitioner is admitted to post arrest bail on furnishing bail bond in the sum of Rs.2,00,000/- with one surety in the-like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court.
7. Needless to observe that the observations made hereinabove are only tentative in their nature and are strictly confined to the extent of disposal of instant bail petition.