IN
THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH AT KARACHI
Criminal Bail Application No.1007 of
2025
|
DATE |
ORDER WITH
SIGNATURE(s) OF JUDGE(s) |
For
hearing of bail application
--------------------------------------------
12.05.2025
Mr. Muhammad Nadeem
Qureshi a/w
Muhammad Saleem Khan, advocates for applicant
Mr. Sarfraz
Ali Mangi, Special Prosecutor ANF
------------------------------------
Shamsuddin Abbasi, J:- Applicant/accused
Abdul Mateen Mehboob son of
Mehboob Muhammad, seeks post-arrest bail in FIR No.04/2024,
registered at P.S. ANF Clifton, Karachi for offence under sections 9, 14 and 15
of the Control of Narcotic Substances (Amendment) Act, 2022, after rejection of
his bail plea by learned trial Court vide order dated 14.04.2025.
2. Succinctly, the facts as
enumerated in the FIR are that on 16.01.2024 at about 1330 hours at ANF
Examination Area, SAPT, Karachi, ANF team head by complainant Shafiq AHmed Khan of PS ANF
Clifton Karachi recovered 19 kilograms of prescribed tablets containing
‘Clonazepam 2 Mg’ and 4.600 Kilograms of ‘Clonazepam 5 Mg.’ from Container No.BMOU-4619084 bound
for export from M/s Medisure Laboratories Pakistan
(Pvt.) Limited, Karachi to M/s Medisure Biotech
Trading Company, Burma.
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