ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, CIRCUIT COURT, LARKANA

1st. Crl. Bail Application No.S-608   of  2023.

DATE

OF HEARING

ORDER WITH SIGNATURE OF HON’BLE JUDGE

 

1.   For orders on office objection ‘A’.

2.   For hearing of bail application.

 

13.11.2023.

Mr. Abdul Ghani Bijarani, advocate for the applicant.

Mr. Ali Anwar Kandhro, Addl. P. G.

 

                                      O R D E R .

MUHAMAD SALEEM JESSAR, J.- Applicant/accused Najaf Ali son of Bashir Ahmed Mangrio, is confined in jail in Crime No.225/2023, registered at Police Station A-Section Kandhkot, for offence under section 9(b) of the Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997. He applied for grant of post arrest bail, which was declined by the learned 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Kandhkot, vide order dated.10.10.2023, therefore, he has approached this Court with the same prayer.

 

2.       The case has been challaned which is now pending for trial before the Court of 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Kandhkot vide CNS Case No.38/2023 Re-The State v. Najaf Ali Mangrio.

 

3.       Brief facts of the prosecution case, as disclosed in the FIR lodged by complainant SIP Muhammad Hassan Bahalkani on 16.09.2023, at 1720 hours, are that on said date, at about 1600 hours, he while being on patrolling within his jurisdiction arrested the applicant and recovered 500 grams of contraband Charas from his possession, duly concealed in a black colour shopping bag, same was taken into possession by the police. To such effect present FIR on behalf of State was registered.

 

4.       Learned counsel for the applicant submits that as per prosecution case, the applicant was arrested near main gate of Degree College, which is the busiest place of Kandhkot town, yet no independent person was picked or associated to witness the alleged recovery; that the offence does not attract the prohibition contained in Section 51 of the CNS Act, 1997; that the case has been challaned and the applicant is not required to police for any further investigation. Learned counsel, therefore, prays for grant of bail to the applicant.

 

4.       Learned Addl. P. G, appearing for the State, does not oppose the bail application, contending that the offence with which the accused is charged does not fall within the prohibitory clause of Section 497, Cr.P.C.

 

5.       Admittedly, the recovery shown is of only 500 grams of contraband Charas from the applicant/accused and such recovery being less than one kilogram attracts the provision of Section 9(b) of Control of Narcotic Substances, Act 1997 providing a maximum sentence of 7 years, which does not exceed the prohibitory clause of Section 497, Cr.P.C. The place of alleged recovery is shown to be the busiest area of Kandhkot town, yet no private person has been picked or cited as witness to such recovery proceedings. Even otherwise, the prosecution launched against accused, smacks of police enmity. It is well-settled principle of law that every accused would be presumed to be blue-eyed boy of law until and unless he may be found guilty of the alleged charge and law cannot be stretched upon in favour of the prosecution, particularly, at the bail stage. Accordingly, I am of the considered view that a good prima facie case of further enquiry within the meaning of subsection (2) of Section 497 Cr.P.C is made out. Consequently, the bail application is allowed and the applicant is ordered to be released on bail subject to his furnishing solvent surety in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand) and P.R bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of learned trial Court.

         

 

                                                                                                Judge

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

M.Y.Panhwar/*