Muhammad Amir vs The State

ORDER

ABDUL M AALIK GADDI, J. Having remained unsuccessful in obtaining his release on bail from the trial Court in Crime No.30 of 2020 registered under section 9(C) of CNS Act, 1997 at Police Station Tando Adam City, now the applicant Muhammad Amir son of Muhammad Iqbal is seeking his release on bail in the Said crime through this bail application.

2. The allegations against the applicant is that on 10.02.2020, he was apprehended by a police party headed by SIP Muhammad Sharif Gadani of PS Tando Adam on being found in possession of 1890 grams of charas and after fulfilment of all the required formalities the accused and case property were brought at police station hence, this FIR.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant argued that the case against the applicant is false, fabricated and based on mala fide, as applicant was not present at the alleged place of incident and the alleged charas has been foisted upon the applicant; that police had recovered four (04) pieces of charas weighing 1890 grams from the possession of applicant however, only 10 grams from each piece was sent for chemical examination and the entire property was not sent for such purpose; that police has violated the mandatory provision of Section 103, Cr.P.C., as Police had an advance information and alleged place of incident is thickly populated area but inspite of the fact complainant did not associate any private person to act as mashir; that case has been challaned and applicant is no more required for further investigation therefore, he prays for allowing the instant bail application.

4. Learned A.P.G has opposed this bail application on the ground that applicant / accused was arrested on the spot with 1890 grams charas in presence of mashirs who have no inimical terms with the applicant and the sample parcels were returned with confirmation that the alleged property was charas. Besides, according to her the offence under which the applicant / accused is charged falls within the prohibitory clause of Section 497, Cr.P.C, therefore, the applicant / accused is not entitled for grant of bail.

5. I have heard the arguments of learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. It appears from the record that case has already been challaned and applicant / accused is no more required for investigation. It is the case of spy information and the applicant was arrested from Railways Godown, which according to the police papers is thickly populated area, but the complainant did not bother to join any independent person either from the place of information nor from the place of incident to witness the event, therefore, on this ground alone false implication of the applicant cannot be ruled out. It is also noted that four (04) pieces of charas weighing 1890 grams were recovered from the possession of applicant out of which only 10 grams from each piece was stated to be separated and sent for examination and the whole property was not sent for such purpose therefore, this aspect of the case also requires further probe whether the entire contraband item allegedly secured from the possession of applicant was charas as started in the FIR otherwise.

6. In view of the above, the applicant is admitted to post-arrest bail subject to his furnishing the solvent surety in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty thousand) and PR bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court.

7. Needless to mention that the observations made hereinabove are tentative in nature and shall not prejudice the case of either party at the time of.

8. Before parting, I would like to make it clear that if the applicant misuses the concession of bail in any manner, then the trial Court is fully authorised to take every action against the applicant and his surety including cancellation of bail without making any reference to this Court. Office is directed to communicate this order to the trial Court for information and compliance.