ASLAM PERVEZ vs THE STATE
This matter concerns a bail application filed by the applicant, Aslam Pervez, who sought post-arrest bail in a narcotics-related criminal case. The core legal question before the Sindh High Court was whether the applicant was entitled to the concession of bail given the specific evidentiary circumstances of the case. The applicant contended that his implication in the offence was based solely on the statement of a co-accused and that no narcotics were recovered from his personal possession. The State counsel did not oppose the application. Upon consideration of the facts and circumstances, and relying on the cited precedents regarding the evidentiary value of co-accused statements and the absence of recovery, the Court held that the applicant had made out a case for the grant of bail. Consequently, the Court allowed the application, directing the applicant to be released on bail subject to furnishing a surety bond in the amount of Rs. 1,00,000 and a personal recognizance bond to the satisfaction of the trial court. The judgment reinforces the principle that where recovery is absent and implication rests on a co-accused's statement, bail is generally appropriate.
- Is an accused entitled to bail when the prosecution's case relies solely on the statement of a co-accused?
- Does the absence of recovery of narcotics from the accused's possession constitute a ground for the grant of bail?
ORDER
1. ' Itis argued on behalf of the applicant that applicant has been implicated on the statement of co- accused and that narcotics were notrecovered from his possession. Learned counsel in support of his contention has relied upon (1) 2006 PCr.LJ 1034, (2) 2005 M LD 950 and (3) 2001 SCM R 14.
2. ' Learned State counsel has no objection.
3. ' In view of the case law and facts and circumstances of the case, the applicant is granted bail subject to furnishing surety in the sum of Rs,1,00,000 (One lac) and P.R. Bond in the like mount to the satisfaction of trial Court.