Azhar Ali alias Zeeba vs The State

JUDGM ENT

IQBAL AHM ED KASI, J. Through the instant criminal bail application, applicant, viz. Azhar Ali alias Zeeba son of Ahmed, seeks post arrest bail, in case FIR No.22 of 2023, registered with Police Station, Hub, District Lasebela, under Sections 9(1)3C of the Control of Narcotic Substances, Act, 1997 (`the Act of 1997').

2. Brief facts of the case are that on 30.01.2023, during area patrolling on motorcycles and mobile vehicles with other Police officials, a spy informer informed the complainant Hasil Kha, IP, that a person, namely, Azhar Ali alias Zebba, deals with narcotics and present at Palal Goth Road, Hub along with narcotics. Upon such information, the complainant along with the other Police officials at about 07:20 p.m., proceeded to Palal Goth, and found a person in suspicious condition, having a plastic bag in his hand, who on seeing the Police party, tried to escape, but was overpowered and on search of his pockets, 03 packets, total weighting 3000 grams of charas were recovered from the plastic bag, possessed by the applicant/accused Out, of the total recovered contraband material 10/10 gram from each packet was separated for chemical examination and sealed in parcel. Nos. 1,2 and 3, while remaining substance was sealed in parcel No.4. On further checking a pistol of 9MM bearing No.T0620-09C13474 with 04 loaded live cartridges were also recovered from the exclusive possession of applicant/accused.

3. After arrest, the applicant/accused moved bail application before Special Judge CNS/Additional Sessions Judge-I, Hub (the trial Court), who after hearing the arguments, rejected the application, vide order dated 13.02.2023, hence this application.

4. Learned counsel for applicant contended that complainant has involved the applicant/accused with mala fide intention, because mother of applicant filed a complaint against the SHO, Hub City, in the Court of Judicial Magistrate-I, Hub; that no alleged narcotics whatsoever was recovered from the possession of applicant/accused; that the alleged place of occurrence is populated area, despite spy information, the complainant violated the provision of Section 103, Cr.P.C by not associating any private person as a mashir.

5. Learned APG opposed the learned counsel for applicant and stated that a huge quantity of contraband was recovered from the possession of applicant/accused and in this behalf prompt FIR has been lodged.

6. We have carefully considered the arguments of the learned counsel for applicant and learned APG for the State and perused the material available on record. Perusal of record shows that the allegations leveled against the applicant/accused are that he was arrested on a tip-off and from his possession 3000 gram of Hasish/Charas was recovered. There was public end information but in-spite of such information, the raiding party, did not try to associate a private witness. The recovery was taken place from the populated area but no effort was made by the raiding party to associate any person from the locality to become witness of memo. of arrest and recovery. It is also apparent on the face of the record that prior of lodging of instant FIR, the mother of applicant/accused has moved an application/complaint under Section 200, Cr.P.C, before the Judicial Magistrate-I, Hub, against the SHO/SI of Hub, Police Station with the allegations that the SHO and Police officials tease the entire family of applicant/accused, while in the same, the mother of applicant/accused also recorded her statement before the Court about the same incident, as such, seemingly due to filing of the above case, the complainant might have involved the applicant/accused in the present case, which makes the case of applicant/accused, one of further inquiry. It is an admitted position that case has been challaned and applicant is no more required for further investigation. It is admitted that the case of prosecution based upon the evidence of Police officials. Since the whole of the case of prosecution rests upon the evidence of Police officials, therefore, their evidence is required to be minutely scrutinized at the time of trial, whether offence as mentioned in the FIR allegedly committed by the applicant in manner as narrated by the complainant or otherwise. There is nothing on record to shows that applicant is previously convicted or has been arrested in the case of similar nature in past.

7. The ultimate outcome of above discussion is that the application is hereby allowed and the applicant, viz. Azhar Ali alias Zeeba son of Ahmed, is released on bail, in case FIR No. 22 of 2023, registered with Police Station Hub, District Lasebela, under Section 9(1)3c of the Act of 1997, subject to furnishing solvent surety bonds in the sum of Rs.3,00,000/- (rupees three hundred thousand) with PR of the like amount to the satisfaction of the Additional Registrar of this Court or trial Court.

The observations made hereinabove are tentative in nature, which shall not affect merits of the case.