IN
THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH AT KARACHI
Criminal Bail Application No.697 of
2025
|
DATE |
ORDER WITH
SIGNATURE(s) OF JUDGE(s) |
For
hearing of bail application
-----------------------------------------
16.04.2025
Mr. Ayaz Hanif, advocate for applicant
Ms. Seema Zaidi, Additional Prosecutor General Sindh
SIP Saeed
of PS Mehmoodabad
------------------------------------
Shamsuddin Abbasi, J:- Shahzaib alias Chitta son of
Muhammad Akram, seeks post-arrest bail in FIR No.318/2024,
registered at Police Station Mehmoodabad, Karachi for
offence under Sections 9(1)3(C) of the Control of Narcotics Substance Amended Act,
2022, after the same was declined by learned District and Sessions Judge,
Karachi South vide order dated 14.11.2024.
2. Succinctly, the facts as
enumerated in FIR are that on 21.10.2024 present applicant was arrested from
Street No.1, Naala Para, Azam
Town, Mehmoodabad, Karachi
and from his possession 3500 grams charas was
recovered in presence of mashirs, hence the subject
FIR.
3. It is inter-alia contended by counsel for applicant that there is
violation of Section 103, Cr.PC and offences does not
come within the ambit of prohibitory clause of section 497, Cr.PC;
that the applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in this case and
foisted narcotic by complainant with malafide intention and ulterior motives as
otherwise he has nothing to do with the alleged offence, as such, applicant may
be released on bail as the matter requires further inquiry.
4. On the other hand, learned Additional
Prosecutor General Sindh opposed the grant of bail on the ground that case pertains
to huge quantity of charas weighing 3500 grams, that
chemical report is positive, as such, applicant does not deserve to be released
on bail in view of Section 51 of the Act. Per learned A.P.G., association of
independent witness, especially in narcotic cases, is not necessary, such
requirement has been excluded by virtue of Section 25 of the Act and non-association
of private witness is not a serious defect in such like cases.
5. Heard learned counsel for the applicant
as well as learned Additional Prosecutor General Sindh and perused the material
available on record.
6. Admittedly, a huge quantity of charas weighing 3500 grams has been recovered from the
possession of applicant/accused in presence of mashirs.
Insofar as the application of Section 103, Cr.P.C. is concerned, suffice to say
that such a requirement has specifically
been excluded by virtue of Section 25 of the Act. It has been
observed by the Hon’ble apex Court in the case of Muhammad Noman Munir v.
The State and another (2020 SCMR 1257), wherein while rejecting the bail
plea in a case of recovery of 1380 grams of cannabis with 07 grams heroin, it
has been held as under:-
“Insofar
as non-association of a witness from the public is concerned, people collected
at the scene, despite request abstained to assist the law and it is so
mentioned in the crime report itself, a usual conduct symptomatic of societal
apathy towards civic responsibilities. Even otherwise, the members of the
contingent being functionaries of the State are second to none in their status, with
their acts statutorily presumed, prima facie, as intra vires.”
7. As regards to the argument that matter
requires further inquiry and applicant deserves to be enlarged on bail, law on the point is quite clear that an accused who
is seeking bail in a case falling within the ambit of prohibitory clause of
Section 497, Cr.PC is required to bring his case
within the ambit of further inquiry not by raising defence
plea but from the material collected and, that too, by tentative referral
thereof. It is noteworthy that keeping in view the severity of like offences,
legislatures has included Section 51 in the Act which, prima facie, creates
bar in granting bail to
an accused in like cases, therefore, bail cannot be sought or entertained by mere
claiming a case of further inquiry.
8. It is well settled that at bail stage
deeper appreciation is not permissible under the law but as far as the evidence
which is on the surface of record of this case shows that the applicant is,
prima facie, connected with the offence with which he has been charged. No
evidence of enmity or animosity in terms of malafide or ulterior motive has
been brought on record, which might have actuated the complainant to falsely
implicate the applicant or implant such a huge quantity of charas on him, thus,
the applicant is, prima facie, involved and is well connected with the
commission of offence and the question of grant of bail in like cases does not
arise. Pertinent to note that such an offence is directed against the Society
and the Hon’ble apex Court has time and again
held that the menace of drugs is increasing day by day due to various reasons
and it is very disheartening to observe that every day there are many reports
of drug peddlers being caught with drugs, which is great threat to a peaceful
society and is affecting many lives, especially the youngsters, therefore, culprits
involved in like cases do not deserve any leniency and liable to be dealt with
iron hands so as to curb such activities.
9. For the foregoing
reasons, the applicant is not found to be
entitled for grant of post-arrest bail. Resultantly, the bail application is
dismissed. It is, however, need not to state that the observations
recorded herein above are of tentative assessment and meant for the purpose of
the instant bail application, therefore, the learned trial Court shall not be
influenced in any manner whatsoever while
deciding the case of the applicant/accused on merits. However, learned trial
Court, seized of the matter, is directed to expedite the trial and ensure its
early conclusion preferably within a period of three months.
10. This
Criminal Bail Application No.697 of 2025 stands dismissed in the foregoing terms.
J U D G E
Gulsher/PS