Citation Name: 2025 PCrLJ 1996 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDHBookmark this Case Mst. Zainab alias Jamna vs State S

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

Citation Name: 2025 PCrLJ 1996 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDHBookmark this Case Mst. Zainab alias Jamna VS State S. 497---Control of Narcotic Substances Act (XXV of 1997), S.9(1), S.No.3(c)---Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984), Arts. 164 & 165---Possession of narcotic substances---Bail, grant of---Further inquiry---Allegation against the petitioner-accused was that 1166-grams charas was recovered from his possession---Admittedly, the applicant/accused was arrested from the street, which was a thoroughfare from where the alleged recovery of 1166 grams of charas had taken place, but the complainant/Police Official did not record or photograph the search, seizure or arrest procedures---Article 164 of the Qanun-e-Shahadat, 1984, explicitly allowed the use of evidence obtained through modern devices or techniques---Article 165 of the said law superseded all other laws in that regard---Police Officers were generally equipped with cell phones containing built-in cameras and in this case modern devices and also cameras had not been used---First proviso to S.497(1),Cr.P.C., stipulated that the Court might pass order for the release on bail of any person under the age of sixteen years, any woman, or any person who was sick or infirm, who was accused of an offence---Term "such an offence" in this proviso referred to offences listed under the second part (prohibitory clause) of S.497(1), Cr.P.C., as for all other non-bailable offences, the Court was already empowered to grant bail under the first part of S.497(1), Cr.P.C.---Therefore, the first proviso granted the Court the same discretion to grant bail in respect of offences covered by the prohibitory clause against accused persons who were under the age of sixteen, women, or those who were sick or infirm, as it did under the first part of S.497(1)---Meaning thereby that, for the persons mentioned in the first proviso to S.497(1), Cr.P.C.,bail should generally be granted and refused only in exceptional circumstances---No exceptional circumstance existed in the present case meriting dismissal of the instant bail application---It was alleged by prosecution that other cases of similar nature had been registered against the applicant thus she was not entitled to get bail, however, mere registration of other criminal cases against an accused did not disentitle her for the grant of bail if on merits she had prima facie a good case for enlargement of bail---Applicant had made out her case at this stage for further inquiry---Bail application was allowed, in circumstances.

Citation Name: 2025 PCrLJ 1996 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDHBookmark this Case Mst. Zainab alias Jamna vs State S — 2025 PCrLJ 1996 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2025 PCRLJ