KARACHl: The Sindh Control of Narcotic Substances (CNS) Act 2024 has barred trial courts from granting bail to suspects in drug-related cases, a judge has stated.

Additional District and Sessions Judge Liaqat Ali Khoso, who also serves as the presiding officer of the Special Court (Control of Narcotic Substances) Malir, observed this while dismissing a postarrest bail application of a suspect arrested for allegedly possessing over one kilogramme of hashish on grounds of lack of jurisdiction.

The court noted that the applicant, who was charged with possessing 1,030 grams of hashish, was arrested in February 2024 and his case fell under the purview of the Sindh CNS Act 2024 that carried stringent punishments.

The new law made it clear that the benefit of Sections 496 and 497 of the criminal procedure code the two clauses pertain to grant of bail in bailable and non-bailable offences by sessions courts shall not be granted to an accused person charged with an offence under the provincial anti-narcotics law.

The order said the Sindh law has an overriding effect on the Control of Narcotics Substances Act, 1997 and its subsequent amendments as Section 45 (1) of the Sindh CNS law reads: `The Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997 to the extent of the Province of Sindh, is hereby repealed.

The court ruled that in view of legal position, the `instant post-arrest bail application is not maintainable in the eyes of law; hence, the same is dismissed being barred by Section 35 of Sindh Control of Narcotic Substances Act 2024`.

During the arguments on the maintainability on the bail plea, state prosecutor Riaz Ali Soomro contended that the provincial law was promulgated in October 2024 and it repealed the operation of CNS Act, 1997 in Sindh.

He submitted that the applicant had the only remedy to be availed was to approach the writ jurisdiction of the Sindh High Court under Article 199 of the Constitution.

The defence counsel has argued that this court has powers to hear the bail application and decide it on merits. He further submitted that the right of bail could not be withdrawn by the law as it was against fundamental rights.