IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PAKISTAN 
(Appellate Jurisdiction) 
 
 
 
PRESENT: 
Mr. Justice Asif Saeed Khan Khosa, CJ 
Mr. Justice Mazhar Alam Khan Miankhel 
Mr. Justice Qazi Muhammad Amin Ahmed  
 
 
 
Criminal Appeal No. 282 of 2019 
(Against the order dated 16.05.2019 passed by the Islamabad High 
Court, Islamabad in Criminal Miscellaneous No. 283-B of 2019) 
 
 
 
Anti-Narcotics Force through its Regional Director/Force 
Commander, A.N.F. Rawalpindi 
 
 
…Appellant 
 
 
 
 
 
versus 
 
Qasim Ali 
 
           …Respondent 
 
 
 
For the appellant: 
Ch. 
Ehtisham-ul-Haq, 
Special 
Prosecutor, Anti-Narcotics Force 
 
Syed Rifaqat Hussain Shah, AOR 
 
Mirza Abdul Rehman, A.D. 
 
Faizan Khawaja, I.O.  
 
For the respondent: 
Syed Wusat-ul-Hassan Shah, ASC 
 
with the respondent in person.  
 
 
 
Date of hearing: 
21.08.2019 
 
JUDGMENT 
 
 
Asif Saeed Khan Khosa, CJ.: 
 
Criminal Miscellaneous Application No. 1233 of 2019 
 
 
This miscellaneous application is allowed and the rejoinder 
filed by the respondent is permitted to be brought on the record of 
the main appeal. Disposed of.  
Criminal Appeal No. 282 of 2019 
2
Criminal Appeal No. 282 of 2019 
 
2. 
Through this appeal by leave of this Court granted on 
26.07.2019 the Anti-Narcotics Force/appellant has assailed the 
order dated 16.05.2019 passed by a learned Division Bench of the 
Islamabad High Court, Islamabad in Criminal Miscellaneous No. 
283-B of 2019 whereby the respondent was admitted to post-arrest 
bail in case FIR No. 4 registered at Police Station Anti-Narcotics 
Force/R.D. North, Rawalpindi on 12.01.2019 in respect of offences 
under sections 9(c) and 15 of the Control of Narcotic Substances 
Act, 1997.  
 
3. 
According 
to 
the 
prosecution 
the 
respondent 
was 
apprehended red-handed while sitting in a motorcar through the 
search of which vehicle charas weighing 1600 grams, cocaine 
weighing 57 grams, ice weighing 10 grams and some other 
intoxicants had been recovered and subsequently a report had 
been received from the Chemical Examiner in the positive. The 
respondent had been admitted to post-arrest bail by the High 
Court mainly on the grounds that in view of the sentencing 
guidelines of the Lahore High Court, Lahore issued in the case of 
Ghulam Murtaza and another v The State (PLD 2009 Lahore 362) 
the respondent was not likely to be punished for a period of 
imprisonment attracting the prohibitory clause contained in 
subsection (1) of section 497, Cr.P.C.; a co-accused of the 
respondent was not apprehended at the spot; and the case against 
the respondent called for further inquiry into his guilt within the 
purview of subsection (2) of section 497, Cr.P.C. We, however, have 
not been able to find the said grounds weighing with the High 
Court to be valid or sufficient for the purpose of admitting the 
respondent to post-arrest bail in the present case because all the 
said considerations were in derogation of the law. It has already 
been clarified by this Court in the case of Socha Gul v The State 
(2015 SCMR 1077) that the sentencing guidelines issued by the 
Lahore High Court, Lahore in the above mentioned case of Ghulam 
Murtaza are not relevant at the stage of bail or during the trial. 
Criminal Appeal No. 282 of 2019 
3
Failure of the raiding party to apprehend the respondent’s co-
accused could hardly react upon the merits of the respondent’s 
case for bail. Section 51 of the Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 
1997 clearly ousts application of the provisions of section 497, 
Cr.P.C. to the cases under the Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 
1997 and, thus, any reference to subsection (2) of section 497, 
Cr.P.C. by the High Court while admitting the respondent to bail 
was uncalled for. 
 
4. 
 We have pertinently observed that the merits of the case 
against the respondent had not been attended to by the High Court 
at the time of passage of the impugned order by it. It shall, 
therefore, be fair and proper if instead of canceling the 
respondent’s bail an opportunity may in the first instance be 
afforded to the High Court to attend to the merits of the case 
against the respondent for the purposes of his admission to bail. 
This appeal is, therefore, allowed, the impugned order passed by 
the High Court on 16.05.2019 is set aside, the matter of the 
respondent’s bail is remanded to the High Court for a fresh 
decision of the same on the merits of the petitioner’s case and 
during the interregnum the respondent shall be deemed to be on 
ad-interim post-arrest bail which the High Court may confirm or 
not. This appeal is disposed of in these terms.  
 
Chief Justice 
 
Judge 
 
Judge 
Islamabad 
21.08.2019 
Approved for reporting.  
 
Arif 
