ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, CIRCUIT COURT, LARKANA

Crl. Bail Appln. No.S-513   of  2012

DATE OF HEARING

ORDER WITH SIGNATURE OF HON’BLE JUDGE

28.01.2013.

1. For orders on office objection.

2. For Hearing.

Messrs Muhammad Murad Chachar and Abdul Rahman A. Bhutto, advocates for the applicant.

Miss Shazia Surahio, State Counsel.

                             --------------------

                   Learned Counsel for the applicant has moved this bail application in crime No.144/2012, registered at Police Station Kashmore, for offence under Section 9(c) of the Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997.

                   The brief facts leading to the registration of the F.I.R are that on 29.07.2012, SIP Ziyad Ali Noonari, SHO P.S Kashmore, on a tip-off, arrested applicant/accused Hazaro alias Commando at Adyo Wah, Kashmore and in presence of mashirs LPC Assadullah and PC Ghulam Panjal allegedly recovered polythene shopping bag containing 2 kilograms Charas from his possession.

                   It is contended by the learned Counsel for the applicant that in terms of the prosecution story the officials on spy information reached at the site without any private mashirs/witnesses and they under spy information allegedly procured and recovered from the applicant who was stated to be carrying 2 kilograms/2000 grams of Charas in shape of 10 slabs, which were containing in a plastic shopper.  It is contended by the learned Counsel that no independent witnesses were cited and that the applicant was not previously convicted.  Learned Counsel further submits that it is a case of enmity between the present applicant and Khosa community and this F.I.R has been registered at their instance though it has not been pleaded in the bail application moved before the trial Court.

                   On the other hand, learned State Counsel has opposed the bail application and submitted that private witnesses normally avoid to involve themselves in such offence and therefore, the private mashirs were not arranged.

                   On a query of this Court that 10 multiple samples were said to be containing in one parcel, how it could be possible for the chemical examiner to examine and give report regarding 2 kilograms of charas as 10 samples cannot be distinguished to be taken from each slab as all those 10 samples were said to be contained in one parcel, learned State Counsel concedes that such was a lacunae and lapse on the part of the investigation and in fact there should be 10 independent samples which should be wrapped in 10 separate parcels and should be sent for chemical examination with 10 parcels for independent reports.  This is a glaring negligence on the part of the investigation and on these lapses sometimes rather most of the times the accused escapes.  Be that as it may, since it is yet to be proved that all those 10 samples were in fact taken from 10 slabs which the prosecution has procured contained charas, it becomes a case of further enquiry.  It is yet to be determined that all 10 slabs are of charas.  Consequently, I allow this bail application.  The applicant be released on bail subject to furnishing surety in the sum of Rs.300,000/- and P.R bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court.

                                                                                                JUDGE