Noor Shah vs The State
This matter arises from a post-arrest bail application filed by the applicant, Noor Shah, through Section 497 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898, after being refused bail by the Special Judge (Narcotic) Shaheed Benazir Abad. The applicant was arrested with an alleged recovery of 2000 grams of charas and an unlicensed pistol. The core legal question revolves around whether the applicant is entitled to post-arrest bail on the ground of further inquiry considering the lack of independent witnesses, delay in chemical examination, prior alleged illegal custody, and statutory delay in the trial. The Sindh High Court held that the absence of independent witnesses, delayed chemical examination, prior custody, lack of apprehension of tampering, and prolonged incarceration without effective trial progress make out a case for further inquiry. The court laid down the principle that where circumstances like delayed chemical analysis, lack of independent corroboration, and prolonged custody without trial progress exist, bail should be granted on the basis of further inquiry.
- Whether the absence of independent witnesses and delay in chemical examination of narcotics justify post-arrest bail on the ground of further inquiry?
- Does prolonged incarceration without effective progress in trial entitle an accused to bail in narcotics cases?
- Whether prior alleged illegal confinement by police is a relevant factor when considering a post-arrest bail application?
- Section 497, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
ORDER
Irshad Ali Shah J. It is alleged that on arrest from the applicant was secured 2000 grams of charas beside an unlicensed pistol by police party of P.S Qazi Ahmed led by Inspector Muhammad Saleem Mughal, for that the present case was registered.
2. The applicant on having been refused post arrest bail by learned Special Judge (Narcotic) Shaheed Benazir Abad has sought for the same from this court by way of instant bail application u/s 497 Cr .P.C.
3. It is contended by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant was taken by police from his house at Karachi, he was kept confined illegally and then was involved in this case falsely by the police, on filing of petition for his release from wrongful confinement before Hon'ble High Court of Sindh at Karachi; there is no independent witness to the incident and the case property has been subjected to chemical examination with delay of about eight days. By contending so, he sought for release of the applicant on bail on the point of further inquiry .
4. Learned A.P.G for the State has opposed to release of the applicant on bail by contending that the offence which the applicant has allegedly committed is af fecting the society at large.
5. I have considered the above arguments and perused the record.
6. There is no independent witness to the incident and the case property has been subjected to chemical examination with delay of about eight days; the applicant is said to be in custody of the police prior to his actual involvement in this case. Be that as it may, the case has finally been challenged and there is no apprehension of tempering with the evidence on the part of applicant and the applicant is in custody for more than four months without effective progress in trial. In these circumstances, a case for release of the applicant on bail on point of further inquiry obviously is made out.
7. In view of above, the applicant is admitted to bail subject to his furnishing surety in sum of Rs.50,000/-and PR bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of learned trial Court.