IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH BENCH AT SUKKUR

Crl. Bail Application No.S-612 of 2024

DATE OF HEARING

ORDER WITH SIGNATURE OF JUDGE

For hearing of bail application.

Date of hearing 03.10.2024.

Mr. Rukhsar Ahmed M. Junejo, Advocate for applicant.

Syed Sardar Ali Shah, Addl.P.G for State.

***************

O R D E R

Through instant bail application, applicant Zahidullah seeks Post-arrest bail in Crime No.07/2024 Police Station, ‘Site Excise Rohri Circle for offence under Sections 3,4 PEHO. Earlier his bail application was declined by learned Additional Sessions Judge-III/MCTC-II/Special Judge (CNS), Sukkur vide order dated 16.08.2024.

According to FIR the accused is said to transporting Alcohol in 2001 bottles and in transport pick-up when he was caught red handed.

Learned counsel for applicant contends that the matter was being tried by the concerned Magistrate however, the bail applications before the said trial Court as well as learned Sessions Court has failed to consider that the charges against the applicant carrying punishments of Five and two years respectively, not falling within the prohibitory clause bail was liable to be considered irrespective of the alleged volume alongwith the same being against public policy. He further contends that by virtue of the following authorities the bail in such cases is liable to be considered as the right and denial an exception.

1. Muhammad Ramzan @ Jani v. The State and others (2020 SCMR 717).

2. Dr. Abdur Rauf v. State through DAG (2020 SCMR 1258)

3. Manzoor Khan and another v. The State and another (2022 YLR 2064)

Learned Additional Prosecutor General however, contends that it is not a hard and fast rule that such concession may be allowed in matters where huge quantity of contraband stuff is recovered and in the present case a person having permanent address outside the Province has been charged with the offence and volume of recovery dis-entitles the applicant from being entertained.

Having heard learned counsel for applicant and gone through the record. The concession of bail is available to parties by right in accordance with the nature of offence as described in the law which is further appreciated based upon years of punishment under the provision/s of Section 497/498 Cr.P.C. The same is restrictive of the superior Courts along with the superior Courts authorities present in this regard. The volume itself may be considerable however, while observing the quantities of alleged contraband material sent for examination and as the offence itself does not provide for a quantification by volume. The difference of description between punishment between two and Five years is itself based upon the further elaboration given therein. Irrespectively the non-prohibitory clause is not found to restrict the concession. Learned Additional Prosecutor General though having also offered directions for conclusion of trial within one month as learned Counsel for applicant has brought-up the attention of this Court to the challan wherein the absconder accused is also shown. The required proceedings perhaps may not concluded. Accordingly, bail application is allowed, the applicant is granted bail on submitting solvent surety in the sum of Rs.100,000/- (Rupees One lac) and PR bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of trial Court.

Needless to mention here that observations made herein above are tentative in nature and trial Court may not be influenced of the same and decide the case on its merits.

Bail application stands allowed and disposed of in the above terms.

J U D G E

Ihsan/PS.