ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, CIRCUIT COURT LARKANA

Crl.Bail Appln.No.S-264 of 2020

Date of hearing

Order with signature of Judge

                                    For hearing of bail application.

10.08.2020

Mr.Hizbullah Khaskheli, Advocate for the applicant

                        Mr. Muhammad Noonari, Deputy Prosecutor General

                        ~.~.~.~.~.~.~.~.~.~.~

IRSHAD ALI SHAH, J.- It is alleged that the applicant was found in possession/transporting 11 K.Gs of Charas through his Motorcycle, for that he was booked and reported upon by the police.

2.        The applicant on having been refused post-arrest bail by learned Sessions Judge/Special Judge (CNS), Jacobabad, has sought for the same from this Court by way of instant application under section 497 Cr.P.C.

3.        It is contended by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant being innocent has been involved in this case falsely the police; the complainant has himself conducted investigation of the case which is against the spirit of natural justice; there is no independent witness to the incident and only 05 K.Gs of the Charas has been subjected to the chemical examination that too with delay of about seven days and the applicant is in custody since five months. By contending so, he sought for release of the applicant on bail on point of further enquiry. In support of his contention, he relied upon case of Janib Ali Zardari vs. The State ( 2014 YLR-632).

4.        Learned D.P.G. for the State has opposed to grant of bail to the applicant by contending that the applicant has committed the offence, which is affecting the society at large.

5.        I have considered the above arguments and perused the record.

6.        The name of the applicant is appearing in the FIR with specific allegation that he was found in possession/transporting 11 K.Gs of Charas through his motorcycle. In that situation, it would be premature to say that the applicant being innocent has been involved in this case falsely by the police by making foistation of Charas upon him. The police officials are as good witnesses as others and there appears no reason to disbelieve them at this stage. There is nothing in law which prevents the complainant from conducting the investigation of the case like the present one, wherein the investigation would stand completed materially on arrest of the accused. The delay in dispatching the Charas to the chemical examiner could not be resolved by this Court while deciding the bail application. If for the sake of arguments, it is believed that only 05 K.Gs of Charas have been subjected to chemical examination, even then such fact is not enough to enlarge the applicant on bail by making a conclusion that his case is calling for further inquiry. The applicant may be in custody for about five months but the same is not enough to enlarge him on bail in case like present one which is entailing the punishment of death or life. There appear reasonable grounds to believe that the applicant is guilty of the offence for which he is charged.

7.        The case law which is relied upon by learned counsel for the applicant is on distinguishable facts and circumstances. In that case, the FIR was lodged against the accused at the instance of high-ups of the police and it was not containing the names of recovery witnesses. In the instant case, the FIR has not been lodged at the instance of high-ups and it contains the names of mashirs to recovery.

8.                    No case for grant of bail to the applicant is made out. Consequently, the instant bail application is dismissed.

                                     J U D G E