SHERAZ KHAN vs THE STATE

' MUHAMMAD ALAM KHAN, J.---Having been involved in case F.I.R. No,228, dated 14-4-2008 under section 9 of the C.N.S.A., 1997 of PS. Hangu District Hangu was refused bail by the learned Addl.

Sessions Judge Hangu vide order, dated 20-5-2008. Sheraz Khan son of Akbar Khan resident of Meri Banda District Kohat has come to this Court with a prayer for his release on bail.

2. Briefly narrated the facts of the case are that on 14-8-2008 Zainullah A.S-I. Along with Anjum Nadeem, Yasir Adil, Akbar Waheed, Alamzeb and Rehman along with others police contingent had laid a picket near Qazi Talab Hangu. In the meantime a pick up from Shahu Khel was intercepted and checked where a young boy was having a plastic shopper in his lap. On checking it contained charas weighing 4500 grams out of which 4 grams of Charas was separated for chemical analysis and the remaining was separately sealed in a parcel. On enquiry the accused disclosed his name Sheraz Khan son of Akram Khan and thus, he was arrested.

3. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the record of the case.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the Charas Gardah is not Charas in its entirety, which is subject to baking and chemical process. It was also argued that the alleged recovery was made on 14-4-2008 and the alleged sample was received in Laboratory on 5-5-2008.

5. It was next submitted that the petitioner is innocent and has been falsely roped in the case.

6. Miss Surriya Jabeen Advocate, the learned counsel for the State vehemently opposed the prayer of bail of the petitioner on the ground of direct charge in the F.I.R. And recovery of contraband from the personal possession of the petitioner.

7. I have anxiously considered the arguments of the learned counsel for the parties.

8. Perusal of the record reveals that according to F.I.R. 4500 grams Gardah Charas was recovered from the possession of the accused-petitioner, which is not `charas' in its entirety and is always subject to baking and chemical process. After this process the quantity is always substantially reduced, as held in the case of Nisar Khan v. The State (2007 YLR 836.)

9. The recovery in this case was allegedly made on 14-4-2008 and the same was received by the Laboratory on 5-5-2008 after 22 days of the alleged recovery. Under the provisions of Control of Narcotic Substances Act 1997 (Govt. Analysis Rules) 2004 sample has to be sent to the Laboratory within 72 hours. In the instant case it is not discernible from the record that during 22 days of the recovery in whose possession the sample remained which has made the case of the accused- petitioner one of further enquiry in view of the judgment handed down in the case of Iftikhar alias German v. The State (2005 Cr.LJ 1245) and Inayatullah v. The State (2006 PCr .LJ 840).

10. The investigation in the case is complete. Challan has been put in Court and trial is in progress and the petitioner is no longer required to be kept in Jail as the same will never serve any useful purpose.

' In view of the facts and circumstances of the case narrated above this bail application is accepted and the accused petitioner is ordered to be released on bail provided he furnishes bail bonds in the sum of Rs, 200,000 (two lacs) with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Illaqa/Judicial Magistrate, who shall see that the sureties are reliable, local and men of means.

' Above are the reasons for my short order dated 22-8-2008.