Khalid Khan vs State

2013 M L D 133

[Peshawar]

Before Assadullah Khan Chamkani, J

KHALID KHAN---Petitioner

Versus

THE STATE---Respondent

Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Petition No.967-P of 2012, decided on 9th August, 2012.

Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)---

----S.497---Control of Narcotic Substances Act (XXV of 1997), S.9(c)---Possession of narcotic-- -Bail, refusal of---Conscious knowledge of narcotic---Scope---Accused, who was driver of the vehicle in question, was stopped at police checkpoint and upon search, 20 kilograms of charas was recovered from specially designed secret cavities in the vehicle---Accused was the only person present in the vehicle and was also driving the same---Accused being driver of the vehicle was required to know each and everything about the vehicle as he was solely in-charge of it--- Available material indicated that accused had conscious knowledge about presence of narcotics in the vehicle---Alleged offence was punishable with either death or anything not less than life imprisonment, therefore, it was covered by the restrictive (prohibitory) clause of S.497, Cr.P.C--- Challan was complete and was likely to be submitted in Trial Court shortly---Bail petition of accused was dismissed, in circumstances.

Noor Alam Khan for Petitioner.

Fazlur Rahman Khan for the State.

Date of hearing: 9th August, 2012.

JUDGMENT

ASSADULLAH KHAN CHAMKANI, J.---Petitioner Khalid Khan, through the instant petition, seeks his release on bail in case F.I.R. No.585 dated 14-6-2012 registered for offence under section 9(c) CNSA at Police Station Chamkani District Peshawar.

2.On a tip off that huge quantity of narcotics would be smuggled from tribal area to Punjab through Suzuki van bearing registration No.LEC/7346, thus, Ishrat Yar Khan, S.I. along with other police personnel laid Nakabandi at the crime spot when in the meanwhile the said vehicle appeared on the scene, which was signalled to stop. On inquiry, the driver disclosed his name as Khalid Khan, the present petitioner. On search of the vehicle, from inside the roof top loud speakers box 20 packets containing chars pukhta were recovered, which on weighment came out to be 20 KGs. Necessary samples from the contraband were sent to FSL for chemical analysis while rest of the bulk was sealed into separate parcel, hence the case was registered against the petitioner.

3.Learned counsel for petitioner contended that the petitioner is innocent and falsely implicated in the instant case. Further submitted that the alleged recovery has not been effected from personal possession of the petitioner. He was also of the view that the petitioner is neither owner of the vehicle nor any driving licence is brought on record to have been recovered from the accused during search. He maintained that the petitioner had no conscious knowledge about availability of narcotics in the secret cavities. Lastly, the learned counsel contended that during search the petitioner did not try to escape from the spot rather he disclosed his correct name and parentage, which indicates his innocence in the alleged crime, therefore, on the available record case for further inquiry is made out.

4.On the other hand, the learned State counsel while refuting the arguments from other side contended that the petitioner was all alone present in the Suzuki van driving the same and no other person was sitting with him, which transpires his direct involvement in the alleged offence and that huge quantity of narcotics has been recovered from the Suzuki van driven by petitioner at the relevant time and that challan is complete, which will be submitted in the trial court shortly, hence in this view of the matter the petitioner is not entitled to the concession of bail.

Arguments heard. Record perused.

5.Admittedly, the petitioner was driving the Suzuki van wherefrom its secret cavities specially designed huge quantity of narcotics i.e. 20 KGs chars have been recovered. The petitioner was all alone present in the vehicle and no other person was sitting with him, which suggests his involvement in the alleged crime. The petitioner being driver of the vehicle was required to know each and every thing about it being sole incharge thereof. Moreover, the narcotic business is increasing day by day, which affects not only the individuals but also the society at large. The available material presumably indicates that the petitioner was having conscious knowledge about availability of narcotics in the Suzuki van. Additionally, the offence for which the petitioner is charged is punishable with death and shall not be less than life imprisonment as such covered by restrictive of section 497, Cr.P.C. Moreover, challan is complete, which is likely to be submitted in the trial court shortly, therefore, in the given circumstances the petitioner is not entitled to the concession of bail.

As a sequel to the above, this petition is dismissed. However, the prosecution is directed to put challan in the trial court within a fortnight and the latter shall endeavour to conclude the trial within six months.

MWA/297/P Bail refused.