Pakistan Case Lawโ† Search
(K.L.R. 1994 Shariat Cases 126)

AMEER AFGHAN vs THE STATE

Citation(K.L.R. 1994 Shariat Cases 126)
CourtLahore High Court
Case No.Criminal MiscNo .2321/B of 1994
Date1994-08-08
Judge(s)Muhammad Zubair
ResultN/A

JUDGMENT S.M. ZUBAIR, J.-- The petitioner who is involved in a case under Articles 3 and 4 of P.O. 4 of 1979, arising out of FIR No.13/94, dated 30.1.1994, registered at Police Station Sodhra, seeks to be admitted to bail.

2. As per F.I.R., it is alleged that on secret information car No.LEW/2366, in which the petitioner was one of the occupants, was checked and therefrom 5 Kilos of Char as and 7 Kilos of Opium was recovered.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the police has involved the petitioner in this case maliciously and falsely, that according to the FIR it is not specified from which part of the car the alleged huge quantity of intoxicant was recovered and the law does not recognise joint possession of the property for placing criminal liability and that articles 3 and 4 of P.O. 4 of 1979, are not attracted to the facts of this case.

Over and above this, learned counsel submitted that two public witnesses, namely, Muhammad Arif and Khan Muhammad have furnished affidavits to the effect that no intoxicant was recovered in their presence; hence the case against the petitioner is one of further inquiry and he is entitled to the grant of bail.

4. Learned counsel for the State assisted by the police officer has opposed this application on the ground that on secret information the police stopped the car in question in which the petitioner was abode and from that car five Kilos of Char as and seven Kilos of Opium was recovered and the case falls within the prohibitory clause; hence the petitioner is not entitled to the grant of bail.

5. I have heard the learned counsel and have perused the record.

Admittedly huge quantity of char as and opium was recovered from the car in which the petitioner was the passenger. The effect of alleged affidavits would be determined at the trial At present, there exist reasonable grounds to believe that the petitioner is involved in a case which falls within the prohibitory clause; hence he is not entitled to the grant of bail The petition is accordingly dismissed.

For educational and research use only โ€” not legal advice. Verify against the official report before relying on it. See our Disclaimer.
DisclaimerยทPrivacyยทTermsยทSearch