ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, KARACHI

Criminal Bail Application No. 1001 of 2022

(Aitbar Ali and another vs. The State)

DATE ORDER WITH SIGNATURE OF JUDGE

For hearing of bail application

20.07.2022

Mr. Muhammad Sahib Khan advocate for the applicants

Mr. Talib Ali Memon Assistant P.G for the State

-.-.-.-.-.-.-.

IRSHAD ALI SHAH, J. It is alleged that on arrest from the applicant beside unlicensed pistols were secured, 1315 and 1100 grams of Charas respectively, when they were found sitting in their car by police party of P.S Site Superhighway led by ASI Muhammad Ejaz for that they were booked and reported upon.

The applicants on having been refused bail by learned Sessions/CNS Judge, Malir have sought for the same from this Court by way of instant application under section 497 Cr.P.C.

It is contended by learned counsel for the applicants that applicants being innocent have been involved in this case falsely by the police by making foistation of Charas and unlicensed pistols upon them on account of filing an application u/s 22-A and B Cr.P.C by their relative; there is no independent witness to the incident; in Roznamcha entry No. 48 of PS Site Superhighway there is tampering with regard to the registration number of the car and weight of charas allegedly secured defers from the one which is disclosed in FIR; investigation of the case is conducted by ASI; the police party was not supposed to carry with it digital scale and there is joint memo which is against the spirit of law. By contending so, he sought for release of the applicants on bail. In support of his contention, he relied upon cases of (i) Muhammad Hussain vs. The State (2012 YLR 768), (ii) Faisal Munir vs. The State through Latif Khan ASI Choki Mayar (2013 P.Cr.L.J 1525), (iii) Shah Nawaz alias Shanoo vs. The State (2014 P.Cr.L.J 482), (iv) Ali Nawaz vs. The State (SBLR 2015 Sindh 232), (v) Dost Muhammad alias Dosoo vs. The State (2017 P.Cr.L.J Note 248), (vi) The State vs. Manzoor Hussain (2018 MLD 1931), (vii) Nasir Mahmood vs. The State (2021 P.Cr.L.J 443) and (viii) Imran ullah and another vs. The State (2021 YLR 583).

Learned Assistant P.G for the State has opposed to release of the applicants to bail by contending that the applicants are neither innocent nor have been involved in this case falsely by the police; independent person(s) are reluctant to extent help to the police in the case like present one; the investigation of the case has been conducted by Sub Inspector; it is the case of conjoint liability; therefore, preparation of joint memo is not against the spirit of law; filing of an application under Section 22-A and B Cr.P.C has nothing to do with the present case; police officials are supposed to carry with them digital scale; as per Sindh Amendment (Act No.III of 2021) offence alleged against applicants entails imprisonment for life or death and the offence which the applicants has allegedly committed is affecting the society at large. In support of his contention, he relied upon the cases of (i) Muhammad Hanif vs. The State (2003 SCMR 1237), (ii) Noor Khan vs. The State (2021 SCMR 1212) and (iii) Bilal Khan vs. The State (2021 SCMR 460).

Heard arguments and perused the record.

The applicants are named in FIR with specific allegation that on arrest from them have been secured not only the unlicensed pistols but 1315 and 1100 (total 2415) grams of charas respectively. It apparently is the case of conjoint liability. In that situation, it would be premature to say that the applicants being innocent have been involved in this case falsely by the police by foisting charas and unlicensed weapons against them. It is a rare phenomenon to foist such a huge quantity of narcotics substance and unlicensed weapons on innocent person(s) only on account of filing an application under Section 22-A and B Cr.P.C allegedly by one of their relative who significantly has not come forward to say anything in favour of the applicants. No doubt there is no independent witness to the incident but for this reason the police officials could not be disbelieved at this stage. The allegation of tampering with the registration number of car and weight of the charas could not be determined for the reason that deeper appreciation of facts and circumstances is not permissible at bail stage. The investigation of the case obviously has been conducted by Sub Inspector and preparation of joint memo in single FIR could hardly said to be against the spirit of law. The police officials obviously have not been prevented from carrying with them the digital scale to be used at the time of need. The offence with which the applicants have been charged is affecting the society at large and there appears reasonable grounds to believe that the applicants are guilty of the offence with which they have been charged.

The case law which is relied upon by learned counsel for applicants is on distinguishable facts and circumstances, same even otherwise could not be given preference over and above the case law which is relied upon by learned Asstt. P.G for the State for the reason that, it has been rendered by Honourable Apex Court of Pakistan.

In view of above, it is concluded safely that no case for grant of bail to the applicants is made out. Consequently, the instant bail application is dismissed with direction to learned trial Court to dispose of the very case within three months after receipt of copy of this order.

Needless to say that the observations recorded above are tentative in nature and same may not influence the case of either party at trial.

JUDGE