ABDUL MAJEED alias MITHU vs STATE and another
This is a second post-arrest bail petition filed by the petitioner, Abdul Majeed alias Mithu, seeking release in a case registered under Section 9(c) of the Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997. The prosecution alleged that the petitioner and a co-accused were observed by police while transporting a sack containing 50 kilograms of charas, which they discarded while fleeing. The petitioner contended that the recovery was planted, that he was falsely implicated, and that no identification parade was conducted. The prosecution opposed the bail, citing the large quantity of narcotics and the prohibition under Section 51(2) of the Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997. Upon review, the Court noted that the investigating officer had recorded that the contraband was found unattended and that no police official witnessed the petitioner throwing the sack. Given the absence of an identification parade and the lack of evidence linking the petitioner to the recovery, the Court held that the case warranted further inquiry under Section 497(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898, and granted bail.
- Does the absence of an identification parade in a narcotics case where the accused allegedly fled the scene constitute grounds for further inquiry under Section 497(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898?
- Is an accused entitled to bail when the investigating officer concludes that the recovered contraband was found unattended and no police official witnessed the accused discarding it?
- Section 9(c), Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997
- Section 51(2), Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997
- Section 497(2), Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
ORDER
This is the 2nd post-arrest bail petition on behalf of the petitioner before this Court. Earlier petition i,e, Cr1. Misc. No, 1212-B of 2013 was dismissed having been withdrawn on 13.02.2013.
2. Through this petition, petitioner Abdul Majeed alias Mithu seeks post-arrest bail in case F.I.R. No, 260/2009 dated 04.06.2009, offence under Sections 9(c) of the Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997, registered at Police Station Saddar Muridkey District Sheikhupura. Allegation against the petitioner is that he alongwith his co-accused namely Waheed alias Chhatu was coming on motorcycle with a sack ,of charas and on seeing the police party they accelerated the motorcycle; they were chased by the police, but both of them made good their escape while throwing the sack of charas weighing 50 kilograms.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner has falsely been involved in this case by the police with mala fide intention just to harass and humiliate him; that nothing was recovered from the possession of the petitioner and the alleged recovery is planted one; that there is no evidence whatsoever collated by the Investigating Officer even after the arrest of the petitioner that he is connected with the allegedly thrown sack of charas; that there is no legal evidence available against the petitioner as no identification parade was held in this case during the whole investigation; that petitioner is behind the bars since 24.12.2012 and no more required for further investigation; that case against the petitioner is one of further inquiry.
4. On the other hand, learned Deputy Prosecutor General opposing this petition contends that a huge quantity of charas weighing 50 kilograms was recovered from the sack thrown by the petitioner; that the offence committed by the petitioner comes within the prohibition of Section 51(2) of CNSA, 1997, therefore, he is not entitled for the bail.
5. Heard. Record perused.
6. Be that as it may, the allegation against the petitioner is that on chasing the police party he threw the sack of contraband charas weighing 50 kilograms and fled away from the scene of occurrence. Learned Law Officer, after consulting the record, states that no identification parade was conducted in this case and that vide zimni No, 29 dated 21.12.2010 Muhammad Anwar, S.I/I.O has opined that the charas was found unattended and there was no police official who saw the petitioner and his co-accused while throwing the sack of charas. Petitioner is behind the bars since 24.12.2012 and is no more required for the purpose of investigation.
7. In view of the above, case against the petitioner is one of further inquiry into his guilt as contemplated under sub-section (2) of Section 497, Cr.P.C, therefore, we accept this petition and admit the petitioner to bail subject to his furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs,200,000/- (Rupees two hundred thousand only) with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court.
8. It is, however, clarified that the observations made herein above are just tentative in nature and strictly confined to the disposal of this bail petition.