IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH AT KARACHI
Criminal Bail Application No.2869 of 2024
|
DATE |
ORDER WITH SIGNATURE(s) OF JUDGE(s) |
For hearing of bail application
--------------------------------------------
21.02.2025
Mr. Muhammad Aslam Shar, advocate for applicant
Mr. Qamaruddin Nohri, D.P.G.
------------------------------------
Shamsuddin Abbasi, J:- Abdul Raheem alias Langra son of Abu Shama, seeks post-arrest bail in FIR No.1065 of 2024 registered at Police Station Zaman Town, Karachi for offence punishable under Sections 9(1)3(C) of the Control of Narcotics Substance Amended Act, 2022, after the same was declined by learned Additional Sessions Judge-V/MCTC, Karachi East vide order dated 11.11.2024.
2. Succinctly, the facts as enumerated in the FIR are that on 19.09.2024 at 09:00 a.m. SIP Muhammad Younus of P.S. Zaman Town Karachi, while patrolling in the area along with subordinate staff, received information that a person is standing inside the ground situated at Sector C/50, Near Football Ground, Korangi No.2 ˝, having huge quantity charas is waiting for someone. Upon such information, SIP reached at pointed place and apprehended the applicant, who disclosed his name Abdul Raheem alis Langra son of Abu Shama, his personal search was conducted and recovered two packets of charas, weighing 2100 grams and cash Rs.1230/- from his possession in presence of police officials. SIP sealed recovered charas at spot and brought the accused and case property at police station where subject FIR was lodged on behalf of State under the above referred section.
3. It is inter-alia contended by counsel for applicant that applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in this case by complainant with malafide intention and ulterior motives as otherwise he has nothing to do with the alleged offence. Per learned counsel, the recovery has been effected on spy information despite that no private mashir has been associated to witness the arrest and recovery, as such, applicant/accused may be released on bail as the matter requires further inquiry.
4. On the other hand, learned D.P.G. has opposed the grant of bail on the ground that case pertains to huge quantity of charas weighing 2100 grams, that chemical report is positive, as such, applicant does not deserve to be released on bail in view of Section 51 of the Act;. Per learned D.P.G., association of independent witness, especially in narcotic cases, is not necessary, such requirement has been excluded by virtue of Section 25 of the Act and non-association of private witness is not a serious defect in such like cases. Learned D.P.G. further submits that applicant/accused has a criminal record, two FIRs Nos.709/2022 and 709/2023 were registered against the applicant/accused at Police Station Zaman Town, District Korngi Karachi. He seriously opposed the bail application.
5. A bare perusal of order declining bail to applicant by learned trial Court reveals that grounds so taken before this Court were well agitated before learned trial Court. Insofar as the application of Section 103, Cr.P.C. is concerned, suffice to say that such a requirement has specifically been excluded by virtue of Section 25 of the Act. It has been observed by the Hon’ble apex Court in the case of Muhammad Noman Munir v. The State and another (2020 SCMR 1257), wherein while rejecting the bail plea in a case of recovery of 1380 grams of cannabis with 07 grams heroin, it has been held as under:-
“Insofar as non-association of a witness from the public is concerned, people collected at the scene, despite request abstained to assist the law and it is so mentioned in the crime report itself, a usual conduct symptomatic of societal apathy towards civic responsibilities. Even otherwise, the members of the contingent being functionaries of the State are second to none in their status, with their acts statutorily presumed, prima facie, as intra vires.”
6. As regards to the argument that matter requires further inquiry and applicant deserves to be enlarged on bail, law on the point is quite clear that an accused who is seeking bail in a case falling within the ambit of prohibitory clause of Section 497, Cr.PC is required to bring his case within the ambit of further inquiry not by raising defence plea but from the material collected and, that too, by tentative referral thereof. It is noteworthy that keeping in view the severity of like offences, the legislatures has included Section 51 in the Act which, prima facie, creates bar in granting bail to an accused in like cases, therefore, bail cannot be sought or entertained mere claiming a case of further inquiry. As regard to submission regarding arrangement of measurement tools etc is concerned, suffice to say that in such like aspects cannot be touched/examined at bail stage and require a response at trial from the concerned.
7. It is well settled that at bail stage deeper appreciation is not permissible under the law but as far as the evidence which is on the surface of record of this case shows that the applicant is, prima facie, connected with the offence with which he has been charged. No evidence of enmity or animosity in terms of malafide or ulterior motive has been brought on record, which might have actuated the complainant to falsely implicate the applicant or implant such a huge quantity of charas on him, thus, the applicant is, prima facie, involved and is well connected with the commission of offence and the question of grant of bail in like cases does not arise. Pertinent to note that such an offence is directed against the Society and the Hon’ble apex Court has time and again held that the menace of drugs is increasing day by day due to various reasons and it is very disheartening to observe that every day there are many reports of drug peddlers being caught with drugs, which is great threat to a peaceful society and is affecting many lives, especially the youngsters, therefore, culprits involved in like cases do not deserve any leniency and liable to be dealt with iron hands so as to curb such activities.
8. For the foregoing reasons, the applicant is not found to be entitled for grant of post-arrest bail. Resultantly, the bail application is dismissed. It is, however, need not to state that the observations recorded herein above are of tentative assessment and meant for the purpose of the instant bail application, therefore, the learned trial Court shall not be influenced in any manner whatsoever while deciding the case of the applicant/accused on merits. However, learned trial Court, seized of the matter, is directed to expedite the trial and ensure its early conclusion preferably within a period of three months.
9. This Criminal Bail Application No.2869 of 2024 stands dismissed in the foregoing terms.
J U D G E
Gulsher/PS