Court Clarifies Bail Amendment in Sindh Narcotics Law Is Prospective Only

The Sindh High Court has issued a decisive ruling regarding the scope of bail provisions under the Sindh Control of Narcotic Substances Act. Prior to the 2025 amendment, Section 35 of the Act imposed an absolute bar on granting bail to individuals charged under the law. The original text explicitly stated that bail would not be granted, overriding general bail provisions under Sections 496 and 497 of the Criminal Procedure Code.

This strict interpretation meant that accused persons in narcotics cases had no legal avenue to seek bail, regardless of circumstances.

Amendment Introduced on August 18, 2025

On August 18, 2025, the Sindh government amended Section 35 to allow bail in certain narcotics cases. The amendment included an enabling clause under Section 1(2), stating: “It shall come into force at once.” This led to legal debate over whether the amendment should apply to cases registered before the date of enactment.

Court’s Interpretation: Prospective, Not Retrospective

The court clarified that the amendment does not apply retrospectively. It emphasized a fundamental legal principle: amendments affecting substantive rights must operate prospectively unless the legislature explicitly states otherwise. In this case, the amendment lacked any clear language indicating retroactive application.

To illustrate this point, the court referenced Section 27 of the same Act, which was amended with a clause stating it would take effect from October 28, 2024. This demonstrated that when lawmakers intend retrospective application, they do so with unmistakable wording. No such clarity was present in the amendment to Section 35.

Impact on Pre-Amendment Cases

As a result, the court dismissed bail pleas in cases registered before August 18, 2025. It ruled that these cases remain governed by the original version of Section 35, which categorically bars bail. The amendment, while progressive, cannot be applied to past cases without violating the constitutional rights of the accused.

The judgment also cited a superior court precedent, affirming that legislative bodies cannot enact retrospective laws that infringe upon fundamental rights guaranteed by the Constitution.

Legal Significance and Future Implications

This ruling reinforces the importance of legislative clarity when altering laws that affect individual rights. It also sets a precedent for how courts may interpret future amendments to criminal statutes in Pakistan.

Legal experts believe the decision will influence how lawmakers draft future reforms, especially in areas involving criminal justice and constitutional protections.

Conclusion

The Sindh High Court’s ruling on the bail amendment under Section 35 of the Sindh CNS Act underscores the judiciary’s commitment to upholding constitutional principles and legislative intent. While the amendment marks a shift toward more lenient bail provisions, its application remains firmly prospective, safeguarding the legal integrity of cases registered before its enactment.