ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH AT KARACHI

Cr.B.A.No. 1035 of 2023

(Mumtaz vs. The State)

Date Order with signature of Judges

For hearing of bail application

06.06.2023

Ms. Nida advocate for the applicant

Mr. Muntazir Mehdi, Addl.PG for the State

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

IRSHAD ALI SHAH, J.- It is alleged that on arrest from the applicant was secured 1045 grams of Charas by police party of P.S, Ajmair Nagri, for that he was booked and reported upon. On having been refused post-arrest bail by learned 1^st Additional/Special Judge/MCTC Karachi Central, the applicant has sought for the same from this Court by way of instant bail application under Section 497 Cr.PC.

2. It is contended by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant being innocent has been involved in this case falsely by the police; there is no independent witness to the incident and co-accused Ismail has already been admitted to interim pre-arrest bail, therefore, the applicant is entitled to be released on bail on point of further enquiry.

3. Learned Addl.P.G for the State has opposed to release of applicant on bail by contending that as per amendment introduced in CNS law, the minimum sentence prescribed for the alleged offence is 09 years; offence which the applicant has allegedly committed is affecting society at large and the applicant is having criminal record. In support of his contention, he relied upon cases of Noor Khan Vs. The State (2021 SCMR-1212) and Gul Din Vs The State (2023 SCMR 306).

4. Heard arguments and perused the record.

5. As per FIR, on arrest of the applicant has been secured 1045 grams of Charas. 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 foisting upon him such recovery. No doubt there is no independent witness to the incident, but for this reason, the complainant and his witnesses could not be disbelieved particularly when they were having no ill-will or malafide to involve the applicant in this case falsely by foisting upon him Charas. The case of co-accused Muhammad Ismail is distinguishable to that of the applicant for the reason that his name was disclosed by the applicant and from him there is no recovery. The minimum sentence prescribed by law by way of Amendment is 09 years. There appear reasonable grounds to believe that the applicant is guilty of the offence, with which he is charged; thus, no case for his release on bail on point of further inquiry is made out. Consequently, the instant bail application is dismissed, with direction to learned trial Court to expedite the disposal of very case against the applicant and make its disposal preferably within two months, after receipt of copy of this order.

JUDGE