IN
THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH AT KARACHI
Criminal Bail Application No.1043 of
2024
|
DATE |
ORDER WITH
SIGNATURE(s) OF JUDGE(s) |
For
hearing of bail application
--------------------------------------------
05.05.2025
Mr. Ubedullah
Ghoto, advocate for applicant
Mr. Zahoor
Shah, Addl: P.G. Sindh
------------------------------------
Shamsuddin Abbasi, J:- Abdul
Riaz Ahmed son of Manzoor
Ahmed seeks post-arrest bail in FIR No.23 of 2025 registered at Police Station Jati, District Sujawal for
offence punishable under Sections 9(1)3(d) of the Control of Narcotics
Substance (Amendment) Act, 2022, after the same was declined by learned Sessions
Judge/Special Judge CNS Sujawal vide order dated
26.03.2025.
2. Succinctly, the facts as
enumerated in the FIR are that on 21.02.2025, while snap checking, police party
apprehended present applicant on motorcycle at 2300 hours, who disclosed his
name as Riaz Ahmed, and five packets of charas lying on fuel tank of his motorcycle, containing charas weighing 5000 grams was recovered. SIP sealed
recovered charas at spot and brought the accused and
case property to police station where subject FIR was lodged on behalf of State
under the above referred section.
3. It is inter-alia contended by counsel for applicant that applicant is
innocent and he has been falsely implicated in this case by complainant with
malafide intention and ulterior motives as otherwise he has nothing to do with
the alleged offence; that there is delay of 45 minutes in lodging of FIR; that
there is violation of Section 103, Cr.PC as the recovery
has been effected on spy information despite that no private mashir has been associated to witness the arrest and
recovery, as such, applicant may be released on bail as the matter requires further
inquiry.
4. On the other hand, learned Additional
Prosecutor General Sindh has opposed the grant of bail on the ground that case
pertains to huge quantity of charas weighing 5000
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. A bare perusal of order declining bail
to applicant by learned trial Court reveals that grounds so taken before this
Court were well agitated before learned trial Court. 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.”
6. 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, which
is against the society. Plea taken by the counsel for applicant that applicant
is private drive of Mr. Trique Razzaque
Dharejo, DIGP Hyderabad and he was annoyed with him
and on his instance a false case has been registered against him but perusal of
record does not show that applicant has moved any application to Inspector
General of Police Sindh for enquiry against the DIGP Hyderabad. Even applicant
has not approached to any other forum against DIGP Hyderabad.
7. 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 alleged offence. 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 for 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.
8. 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.
9. This Criminal
Bail Application No.1043 of 2025 stands dismissed
in the foregoing terms.
J U D G E
Gulsher/PS