RAYASAT ALI vs THE STATE
This is a criminal bail application filed by the applicant Rayasat Ali facing trial before the Special Court No.1 (C.N.S.) Karachi for an offence under section 9(b) of the Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997. The core legal question concerns whether discrepancies between the recovery weight and chemical examiner's report, coupled with a delay in sending the sample for analysis, make the case one of further inquiry under section 497(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898. The Sindh High Court held that in the absence of any explanation for the weight discrepancy and the 17-day delay in sending the sample to the chemical examiner—a stance conceded by the Assistant Advocate-General—the applicant was entitled to the benefit of doubt at the bail stage. The court accordingly admitted the applicant to post-arrest bail, establishing that unexplained evidentiary discrepancies and delays in narcotic sample transmission warrant further inquiry under section 497(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898.
- Does a discrepancy between the recovery weight of narcotics and the chemical examiner's report entitle an accused to bail?
- Whether an unexplained delay in sending a narcotic sample to the chemical examiner constitutes a case of further inquiry under section 497(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898?
- Can an accused be granted the benefit of doubt at the bail stage based on evidentiary discrepancies?
- Section 9(b), Control of Narcotic Substances Act 1997
- Section 497(2), Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
ORDER
1. ' Applicant Rayasat Ali is facing trial in Special Court No.1 (C.N.S.) Karachi, for the offence punishable under section 9(b), C.N.S. Act, 1997.
2. ' We have heard Mr. Abdul Ghaffar Samo, learned counsel for the applicant and Mr. Habib Ahmed, learned A.A.-G. For the State.
3. Mr. Samo has contended that according to Mashirnama of recovery and F.I.R., 1100 grams of Charas were recovered from the possession of applicant Rayasat Ali, while according to the Chemical Examiner's Report, the net weight of entire Charas was 978 grams. There is discrepancy of 122 grams for which there is no explanation. He has further submitted that the applicant is a businessm an and has been falsely implicated because of enmity with Pak Colony Police. He has further submitted that there is a delay of 17 days in sending the sample to Chemical Examiner. The alleged recovery is dated 13-10-2004 and the sample has been sent on 1-11-2004. The learned counsel has submitted that the applicant is entitled to the benefit of doubt even at the bail stage and consequently, he is entitled to be released on bail, as it is a case of further inquiry, as envisaged under subsection (2) of section 497, Cr.P.C. He has further pointed out that even the trial Court has observed that, difference in two weights can be resolved after recording of evidence of complainant.
4. Mr. Habib Ahmed, learned A.A.-G., has frankly stated that at this stage, there is no explanation for the delay and discrepancy in weight of Charas and consequently, he has no objection if bail is granted to the applicant.
5. In the above circumstances, applicant Rayasat Ali is granted bail in the sum of Rs.50,000 (Rupees Fifty Thousand) on furnishing one surety and P.R. Bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of Nazir of this Court. After furnishing of surety before- Nazir of this Court, the Nazir shall transmit the surety papers to the trial Court and if the applicant jumps over the bail, the trial Court is empowered to forfeit his bail bond and take appropriate action in accordance with law, without reference to this Court.
Cited by 7 cases
- USMAN Versus State 2017 YLRN 94
- MUHAMMAD AKRAM vs The STATE 2016 P Cr. LJ 1075
- WAJID alias WAJI vs The STATE 2016 P Cr. LJ 831
- MUHAMMAD ABDULLAH vs THE STATE 2012 YLR 2596
- INAYAT alias ANO vs THE STATE 2012 MLD 926
- KHAIR MUHAMMAD alias KHAIR vs THE STATE 2012 YLR 2298
- AYAZ Versus State 2011 PCrLJ 177