IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH AT KARACHI
Criminal
Bail Application No. 942 of 2018
Altaf @ Sobo/Abro
...
...
..Applicant
Versus
The
State
.
..
.Respondent
Date of hearing : 20.08.2018
Ms. Sajma, advocate
for the Applicant.
Mr. Habib
Ahmed, Special Prosecutor ANF
O R D E R
Fahim Ahmed Siddiqui,
J: The
applicant Altaf @ Sobo/Abro is seeking post arrest bail in a case registered
against him at PS. ANF Gulshan-e-Iqbal,
Karachi under Section 6/9 (C) Control of Narcotics Substances Act 1997.
2.
I
have heard the arguments advanced from either side and perused record produced
before me. After getting enlightened from the valued submissions made at bar
and scanning the record, I have observed as under:
(a)
The
allegation against the applicant is that he was apprehended by the raiding
police party on a tipoff and from his possession 3 kilogram hashish (charas) and 50 grams heroin powder were recovered.
(b)
After recovery of narcotics in considerable quantity,
a sampling was done on the spot. The samples were sent for chemical analyses
and forensic lab furnished a positive report regarding the same.
(c)
As
per FIR, the quantity of recovered hashish (charas)
was 3 kilograms and heroin 50 grams and the same were recovered from the
exclusive possession of the applicant on the spot during his personal search.
(d)
It
will not improve the case of the applicant that the recovery witnesses are
police officer as Section 103 is inapplicable in CNS cases while police
officials are also good witnesses unless something contrary is established to
discredit their capacity as witness.
(e)
The
applicant is well nominated in the FIR with ocular account by the complainant.
The eye-witnesses of the incident also named him as the author of the offence
of keeping / selling of narcotics substance in their statements recorded by
investigating officer under Section 161 Cr.P.C.
(f)
The
recovered quantity is considerable and the recovery of such quantity of
narcotics from him is sufficient to presume that the same was in his possession
with intention to sell the same.
(g)
Learned
counsel for the applicant has not been able to refer to anything from the
record which could suggest that the complainant or any other member of the
raiding party is animus towards the applicant.
(h)
The
case of the applicant falls within the prohibitory
clause of Section 497 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
2.
In
the view of the above observation, coupled with the fact that huge quantity i.e.,
three kilograms of narcotics has been recovered from his possession, the
applicant is not entitled for the concession of bail.
3.
The
above observations are tentative in nature, and shall not be construed by the
trial Court as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case.
4.
Accordingly,
application in hand was dismissed vide short order pronounced on 20th
August 2018 and these are the reasons for the same.
J
U D G E