ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, CIRCUIT COURT, LARKANA

Crl. Bail Appln. No.S- 282  of 2022.

DATE OF HEARING

ORDER WITH SIGNATURE OF HON’BLE JUDGE

1. For orders on office objection ‘A’.

2. For hearing of bail application.

05.07.2022

                        Mr. Muhammad Aslam H. Jatoi, Advocate for the applicant.

                        Mr. Ali Anwar Kandhro, Addl.P.G.

O R D E R

Adnan-ul-Karim Memon, J.       This is a post-arrest bail application filed by the applicant Abdul Hayee alias Balaj son of Abdul Nabi Mengal in respect of F.I.R No.08/2022 registered at Police Station Market, for an offense punishable under section 9 (c) of CNS Act, after the rejection of his post arrest bail from the Court of III-Additional Sessions Jude/ Special Judge CNS, Larkana, vide order dated. 25.03.2022, he has approached this Court.

2.                     Facts of the prosecution case as enunciated in the F.I.R, lodged by SIP Raheem Bux Mugheri on behalf of State are that on 07.02.2022, he (complainant) along with staff while on patrol duty, during which, when they arrived at the backside of Girls Model High School Larkana, a suspected person was found by them, having black colored shopper, who at the arrival of the police tried to escape away, which prompted them to nabb him, who disclosed his name Abdul Hayee alias Balaj son of Abdul Nabi by case Mengal resident of Noshki, District Quetta and the shopper recovered from the said accused was opened, in which five rods of Charas weighing 2500 grams was recovered. After preparation of the memo of arrest and recovery with the signatures of official mashirs, the accused along with recovered Chars was brought tothe Police Station where F.I.R under section 9 (c) of CNS Act,  was lodged on behalf of the State.

3.                     Learned counsel for the applicant contends that the applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated by the police; that all the witnesses are police personnel and sub-ordinate of the complainant hence false implication of the applicant cannot be ruled out; that the applicant along with his other four relatives had come to attend the ‘Dawat’ of his relation, namely, Haji Mumtaz at Larkana and when they reached in the jurisdiction of P.S Market, SIP Raheem Bux stopped them and arrested them for obtaining illegal gratification and on their refusal, series of false F.I.Rs bearing No.08/2022, 09/2022, 10/2022 & 11/2022 was registered against accused persons including the present applicant; that all the accused roped in the aforesaid F.I.Rs are relatives. Learned counsel for the applicant further contends that though as per F.I.R, the applicant was arrested from the busy and populated area, the police have not associated any private person as mashir. Learned counsel further contends that the quantity of recovery of alleged contraband is falling within the ambit of borderline of Section 9(b) of 9(c), therefore, such aspect of the case comes within the scope of further inquiry. Under these circumstances, learned counsel prays the applicant may be enlarged on bail.

4.                     Learned Addl. P. G, vehemently opposes the grant of bail on the ground that the chemical report dated 9.2.2022 is positive and the applicant has not shown any mala fide on the part of the police, hence he does not deserve the concession of post-arrest bail in Narcotic Cases, therefore, the bail application moved by the applicant may be dismissed.

5.                     I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and gone through the material placed on record.

6.                     On my tentative analysis of the record, prima-facie, show that a  good quantity of charas has been recovered from the possession of the applicant.  Besides, it is settled that for deciding the bail application the Court has to observe the tentative assessment, and a deeper appreciation of evidence is not required as the story narrated by the learned counsel could only be ascertained when the complainant is examined by the learned trial Court within a reasonable time. And, from the tentative assessment, prima facie, red-handed arrest of the applicant with a considerable quantity of Charas, confirmed by a positive Chemical Examiner’s report that brings the case of the applicant within the sphere of Prohibition, contemplated by Section 51 of the Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997. The applicant's claim of false implication and other related grounds as raised hereinabove cannot be attended to at this stage, without going beyond the scope of tentative assessment, which is prohibited by law.  As per available record, prima-facie, the view taken by the learned trial Court is not open to a disturbance at this point, till the evidence is recorded on the subject'snarration, for which the learned trial Court is required to expedite the trial.

7.                      In view of the foregoing, this bail application stands dismissed. However, the learned trial Court is directed to examine at least the complainant/ Investigating officer of the case within one month and report compliance through the Additional Registrar of this Court.

8.                      Before parting, it needs not to clarify that the observations recorded above, being necessary for the disposal of the instant bail application, are tentative, therefore, the Trial Court shall not be influenced in any manner whatsoever. however, the direction contained in the order must be attended to positively.

Judge