Muhammad Sulaiman vs State S — 2026 MLD 262 Gilgit-Baltistan Chief Court

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

Muhammad Sulaiman VS State S. 497(2)---Control of Narcotic Substances Act (XXV of 1997), S. 9(c)---Possession of narcotic substances---Bail, grant of---Further inquiry---Prosecution case was that 1000-grams charas in polythene packing was recovered from the possession of accused-petitioner---Alleged incident had taken place during the day time in a town area and the petitioner/accused had been arrested on the spot but the Investigating Officer of the case as usual did not bother to associate a single private/independent person as witness in the recovery proceedings---Provisions of S.103, Cr.P.C, which required two or more respectable inhabitants of the locality to be associated when search was made, had been excluded by virtue of S.25 of Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997, but that waiver could not be made an excuse in each and every case---Where a raid was conducted or an accused was arrested in busy hours of broad day light in a busy market place on the spy information, the non association of independent witnesses would tilt against the prosecution---Police Officials did not make any effort or attempt to use their mobile phone cameras to record or take photographs when the alleged search, seizure and arrest was made by the police specially in such nature of cases---No record was available on the case file regarding deposit of contraband in malkhana; no roznamcha entry existed on the prosecution record about handing over the case property to malkhana incharge---No statement in that connection of malkhana incharge was recorded by the Investigating Officer of the case---No record was also available with the police regarding transmission of alleged recovered contraband to the Forensic Science Laboratory for the purpose of obtaining its expert report/opinion---Law Officer of the Statemiserably failed to show any authentic and credible record or document which could indicate that the alleged recovered contraband had been kept in safe legal custody and thereafter, transmitted to the Forensic Science Laboratory for obtaining its expert opinion by following the required legal mandatory protocols and procedures---Conduct of police showed that the investigation had been carried out in a very casual and stereotype manner without making an effort to discover the actual facts/truths---Such conduct of police would give shelter and definitely would favor the accused even for limited purpose of bail---Prosecution had failed to show that if the polythene packing of charas was separated then what would be the net weight of the alleged recovered charas and that fact also made the instant case one of further inquiry falling within the purview of S.497(2), Cr.P.C.---Bail application was allowed, in circumstances.

Muhammad Sulaiman vs State S — 2026 MLD 262 Gilgit-Baltistan Chief Court

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2026 MLD