' The petitioner stands charged for having committed an offence punishable under section 3/4 of the Prohibition (Enforcement of Hadd) Order, 1979 read with section 9 of the Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997, Vide: F.I.R. No,131, dated 6-12-1998 registered at Police Station, Shakardara, District Kohat.
2. The petitioner after his arrest moved an application before the Judge, Special Court, Kohat (Malik Mujtaba Ahmad) for bail who rejected the same Vide: his order, dated 14-1-1999.
3. The petitioner has now approached this Court for the redress of his grievance alleging therein that he is innocent, falsely charged and, therefore, entitled to be released on bail.
4. Mr. Muhammad Amin Khattak, Advocate, learned counsel for the petitioner and. Kh. Azhar Rashid, learned Assistant Advocate-General, for State present and heard. Record of the case perused.
5. The punishment provided for the offence mentioned above is either death or life imprisonment as the quantity of the narcotics recovered (69 kilograms of Charas) from the car of the petitioner exceeds far more than one kilogram. The petitioner cannot be, therefore, released on bail as laid down in section 51 of the said Act. The same is reproduced as under:-- - "Section 51. No bail to be granted in respect of certain offences:---
(1) Notwithstanding anything contained in sections 496 and 497 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1898 (V of 1898), bail shall not be granted to an accused person charged under any other law relating to narcotics where the offence is punishable with death.
(2) In the case of other offence punishable under this Act, bail shall not be normally granted unless the Court is of the opinion that it is a fit case for the grant of bail and against the security of a substantial amount."
6. The contention of % the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner had no knowledge about the presence of the contraband "Charas" in the secret cavities of the vehicle, has no substance. It shall be looked into at the time of trial.
7. Even otherwise, on a perusal of the available record, it is not at all possible for me to come to the conclusion that reasonable grounds do exist for believing that the petitioner has not committed the offence charged with. The reasons given by the Special Judge for not granting bail to the petitioner are quite convincing and I do not see any justification to interfere with the discretion exercised by him judiciously. Reliance is placed on a case titled Ijaz Ali Khan v. The State reported as 1968 Supreme Court Monthly Review 1168, wherein it was held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court:--- "The petitioner .Who is charged with the offence of murder has been refused bail by the Court below from which he now seeks leave to appeal.
' On examining the facts appearing in the order of the learned Judge in the High Court we are inclined to the view that the conditions laid down in section 497, Cr.P.C., were amply fulfilled in this section.. The petition is dismissed."
8. In the circumstances, this petition for bail is without any force and is accordingly dismissed.