Mst. FURSAN vs State S — 2022 SCMR 1950 SUPREME-COURT

Fields are extracted from the reported citation and judgment text. Where a detail is not stated in the record, it is not shown.

Mst. FURSAN VS State S. 26---Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), Ss. 497 & 498---Provisions of sections 497 & 498, Cr.P.C. that deal with grant of bail in non-bailable offences apply to the offences under the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Control of Narcotics Substances Act, 2019 ('the Act'), by virtue of the general provisions of section 26 of the Act, according to which the provisions of the Cr.P.C. apply to trials and appeals under the Act, except as otherwise provided in the Act. Head NotesCase Description Citation Name: 2022 SCMR 1950 SUPREME-COURTBookmark this Case Mst. FURSAN VS State S. 497(1), first proviso & 497(2)---Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Control of Narcotic Substances Act (XXXI of 2019), S. 11(c)---Constitution of Pakistan, Art. 185(3)---Female accused found in possession of 1005 grams of methamphetamine---Likelihood of repeating the offence---Bail, refusal of---Offence alleged against the accused fell within the prohibitory clause of section 497(1), Cr.P.C.---Accused was arrested red handed on the spot and a considerable quantity of contraband ICE (methamphetamine) was recovered from her personal possession, but no plausible explanation had been offered by her in respect of the narcotics substance---Recovery memo was duly supported by marginal witnesses who were present on the spot with the seizing officer---No ill-will or mala fide had been shown by the accused on the part of police to falsely implicate her in the present case---Accused has thus not been able to make out a case of further inquiry for grant of bail in an offence of prohibitory clause, under section 497(2), Cr.P.C.---Examining the case of the accused under the first proviso to section 497(1), Cr.P.C., as she was a woman, there were three settled exceptions to the rule of granting bail under the said proviso i.e. the likelihood of the accused to abscond to escape the trial; to tamper with the prosecution evidence, which included influencing the prosecution witnesses; or to repeat the offence---Offences relating to narcotic drugs were of such a nature that did indicate the likelihood of the repetition of the offence by the accused---Dealing in narcotic drugs was usually the business of the persons involved therein, and was not a spontaneous or one time act, and the women were often involved in it as carriers for the transportation, supply and sale of narcotic drugs---Likelihood of such an offence being repeated by the accused could not, therefore, be ruled out---Case of the accused thus came within the scope of the exception of likelihood of repeating the offence---Accused was not found entitled to the relief of bail under the first proviso to section 479(1), Cr.P.C. also---Petition for leave to appeal was dismissed. Head NotesCase Description

Mst. FURSAN vs State S — 2022 SCMR 1950 SUPREME-COURT

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2022 SCMR