THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, CIRCUIT COURT, LARKANA

1^st Criminal Bail No.S-559 of 2022

Applicant:            Rabail Gopang through Mr. Abdul Ghaffar Gopang Advocate.

Respondent:        The State

Through Mr. Aitbar Ali Bullo, Deputy Prosecutor General, Sindh.

Date of hearing:  12.12.2022

Date of Order:     12.12.2022

O R D E R

AMJAD ALI SAHITO, J.- Through captioned bail application, applicant Rabail son of Muhammad Ali Gopang has sought for post arrest bail in the case emanating from F.I.R No.135/2022, registered at P.S Kamber City for offence punishable under Section 9 (c) of Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997; after his plea for post arrest bail was declined by the learned            I-Additional Sessions Judge/MCTC, Kamber by dismissing his application vide Order dated 12.08.2022.

2.      It is alleged that the applicant/accused was apprehended by the police party headed by complainant/ SIP Nisar Ahmed Noonari of P.S Kamber City, who secured 1200 grams of chars from his possession in presence of police official witnesses and brought him alongwith recovered contraband material to the police station and registered instant F.I.R.

3.      Learned counsel for the applicant/accused has mainly contended that it is case of  border line between Section 9 (b) and 9 (c) of the Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997; that the applicant has been falsely implicated by the police due to ulterior motives; that the prosecution witnesses are police officials and subordinate to the complainant. Learned counsel lastly prays that the applicant/accused may be enlarged on bail.

4.      Conversely, learned Deputy Prosecutor General appearing for the State has opposed grant of bail to the applicant/accused on the ground that the applicant was caught by the police party alongwith contraband material and he has been nominated in the promptly lodged F.I.R.

5.      It appears that the applicant was apprehended by the police party, who allegedly secured 1200 grams of chars from his possession, which marginally exceeds upper limit of Section 9 (b) and 9 (c) of Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997 and it is case of border line between clauses (b) and (c) of Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997. In this regard, I am fortified by the case law reported as 2020 SCMR 350 (Aya Khan and others v. The State), 2005 YLR 1862 (Riasat Ali v. The State), 2006 P.Cr.L.J 726 (Sherin Muhammad v. The State), 2007 YLR 2968 (Mehboob Ali v. The State), 2009 YLR 189 (Ghulam Hussain v. The State) and 2011 P.Cr.L.J 177 (Ayaz v. The State).

6.      Moreover, all the witnesses of the incident are police officials and none from the public has been cited as witness despite prior information of the incident. The case has been challaned and applicant is in custody and no more required by the police for further investigation.

7.      In view of the foregoing reasons and discussion, I am of the considered view that the applicant has successfully made out his case for grant of bail. Accordingly, the instant bail application stands allowed. Applicant Rabail Gopang is admitted to bail upon his furnishing a solvent surety in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Fifty thousand rupees) and P.R bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court.

8.      The observations made hereinabove are tentative in nature only for the purpose of deciding instant bail application, which shall not in any manner influence the learned trial Court at the time of final decision of the subject case.

                                                       Judge

Manzoor