ORDER SHEET
_____________________________________________________
ORDER WITH SIGNATURE OF JUDGE
_____________________________________________________
For hearing.
Attention is respectfully invited towards office note dated 5.7.2007 at flag “A”.
Mr. Shaukat Hussain Zubaidi for applicant.
Mr. Hyder Shaikh State counsel.
__________
Applicant Mehar Ali Chandio S/O Ali Hidayat Chandio has applied for bail in Crime No. 48/2007 under Section 9(C) Control of Narcotic Substances Act 1997 register at P.S. Naushahro Feroze.
Precisely the facts leading to the case are that complainant SIP Anwar Ali Kamboh along with subordinate staff was on patrolling. At about 6:30 AM when they reached at Police Line Naushahro Feroze, received spy information that Mehar Chandio is selling charas near to his house along with others. They proceeded towards the pointed place. Police encircled them and arrested one person having plastic bag and rest of accused make their escape good. Plastic bag was opened and found 20 big and small pieces of charas weighing 1100 grams, out of which 100 grams was sealed separately for chemical examination.
It is contended by Mr. Shaukat Hussain Zubaidi that the case of the applicant falls within the border line of Section 9(B) and 9(C) of Control of Narcotic Substances Act 1997 as 1100 grams of charas was secured from the possession of the applicant, the quantity of 100 grams marginally exceeded upper limit of 1000 grams whereby in the given circumstances punishment of 14 years provided would be awarded or not, requires further inquiry. In support of the above contention reliance is placed on TAJ ALI KHAN VS. THE STATE (2004 YLR 439), SHIRIN MUHAMMAD VS. THE STATE (2006 P.CR.L.J. PESHAWAR 726).
It is next urged that during investigation entire case property was not sent to the chemical examiner comprises of rods only sample of 100 grams was drawn on examination found to be narcotic substance. It is urged that entire property would have been sent to the chemical examiner for determination as to whether the substance recovered from the possession of the applicant was contraband charas. In support of the above reference has been made to the judgment reported in WARIS KHAN VS. THE STATE (2006 SCMR 1051), MUHAMMAD HASHIM VS. STATE (PLD 2004 SC 856) and DOST KHAN VS. THE STATE (2007 SCMR 1437). It appears that total commodity recovered from the possession of the applicant was not sent to the chemical examiner analyzer nor it would be presumed that sample was taken out from each and every rod. It is next urged that on account of past enmity between complainant / seizing officer namely SIP Anwar Ali Kamboh and father of the applicant as is depicted from the documentary evidence placed on record, investigation in all fairness should have been entrusted to some other police agency so that true picture had emerged after fair and independent investigation. It is next urged that under article 18 of the Police Order 2002 all cases are required to be investigated by the Investigation Branch and investigation has been entrusted by the Provincial Government of the offence under local and special laws with punishment of imprisonment for a term not acceding 3 years with or without any other punishment to the police station staff known as Operation Branch of police. It is noticed that the applicant’s father has filed application against complainant / investigating officer reported to various agencies, due to reported enmity in all fairness investigation should have been entrusted to some other police agency. In support of the above contention reliance is placed on the case of MUHAMMAD FAROOQ KHAN AND 2 OTHERS VS. THE STATE (2007 P.CR.L.J. 1103).
Mr. Hyder Shaikh learned State counsel has conceded to the grant of bail in favour of the applicant.
In view what has been discussed above by a short order dated 21.9.2007 the applicant Mehar Ali Chandio was admitted on bail subject to furnishing solvent surety in the sum of Rs. 100,000/- (Rupees one hundred thousand only) and P.R. bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court These are the reasons for the same.
J U D G E