FIAZ AHMAD ANJUM JANDRAN, J. Through this Crl. Misc. petition, petitioner (Muhammad Sajjad) seeks bail after arrest in F.I.R No. 32, dated 19.03.2 021, registered under Section 9-C of the Control of Narcotics Substances Act, 1997 (Act of 1997) , at Police Station A.N.F . Islamabad.
2. The allegations set-forth in the F.I.R are that on 19.03.2021, at about 2:25 p.m., Jawad Altaf Raja, Inspector alongwith other officials of A.N.F , within the area of Express Highway , near Zero Point, Islamabad was present when he received spy information that Sajjad, a drug smuggler would deliver the narcotics to a customer in Abpara near Tomb of Hazrat Sakhi Mehmood Badshah, Islamabad in vehicle No. QK-457, GLI, silver colour . On the basis of said information, at about 2:40 p.m., they reached at the spot and as per spy information, apprehended the said person, who disclosed his name as Muhammad Sajjad and four packets of charas, wrapped in Khaki insulation tape weighing 1200 grams each, total 4,800 grams was recovered from the diki of the said car .
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in the case as he has no conscious knowledge; that he has no concern with the recovered substance as nothing was recovered from the exclusive possession of the petitioner; that he has no connection whatsoever with the vehicle in question; that petitioner is behind the bars since arrest; that he has no previous record; that investigation is complete and petitioner is no more required for further probe, therefore, entitled to the concession of bail. Learned counsel for the petitioner relied upon case law reported in PLJ 2013 Cr .C. (Lahore) 938 (DB) [Multan Bench Multan].
4. Conversely , learned Special Prosecutor A.N.F submits that huge quantity of narcotics substance was recovered from the vehicle on the disclosure of petitioner; that the report of the Chemical Examiner is positive, therefore, petitioner is not entitled to the concession of bail.
5. Arguments heard, record perused.
6. The substance, split into four packets in Khaki insulation tape, 1200 grams each, in total i.e. 4800 grams charas was recovered from the possession of the petitioner .
7. The petitioner is specifically nominat ed in the F.I.R that he was trafficking 4800 grams of "charas" . The statutory provisions on the subject entails death punishment, imprisonment for life or imprisonment up to 14 years, which falls within the ambit of prohibitory clause of Section 497 Cr.P.C, therefore, in such type of cases, no concession could be extended to the accused persons.
8. When confronted, the Investigating Officer present in the Court apprised that the vehicle used for the commission of alleged offence was owned by one Ibrar and investigation to this effect is being conducted, however , affirmed that petitioner was apprehended with the said vehicle alongwith the narco tics substance and that normally the drug peddlers used to hire the vehicle on rent.
9. The sample parcels of the recovered substance were transmitted to the office of the Chemical Examiner within statutory period, reports whereof confirms that the recovered substance was "Charas" this too, goes against the petitioner .
10. The case law relied upon by learned counsel for the petitioner does not exten d any help to him due to having distinct facts and legal significance.
11. While making tentative assessment of the available material for the purpose of this post-arrest bail, it is viewed that 4800 grams charas has been recovered from the possession of the petitioner , petitioner is charged with an offence entailing death punishment, imprisonment for life or imprisonment up to 14 years, which falls within the ambit of prohibitory clause of Section 497 Cr.P.C, separated/ representative samples were transmitted to the Chemical Examiner within stipulated period, report whereof confirms that the recovered substance is charas, petitioner is not entitled to the concession of post arrest bail at this stage.
12. In view of above, petitioner is not entitled to the concession of post arrest bail. Therefore, instant post-arrest bail petition is dismissed. However , petitioner has a legitimate right to have early decision of his case, therefore, while relying upon case law reported as "2011 SCMR 1332 (Rehmatullah and another Vs. the State) , the learned Trial Court is directed to conclude the trial within a period of three months from the receipt of the order under intimation to this Court.
13. Needless to mention that this is tentative assessment for the purpose of this petition only, which shall not affect/influence trial of this case in any manner .