KHUDA BUX Versus State

ORDER

FAHIM AHMED SIDDIQUI, J.--- Through instant bail application, applicant/accused Khuda Bakhsh Khoso is seeking his relief for grant of bail in a case registered against him at Police Station Yaroo Lund vide Crime No.06/2020 for offence under section 9(c) CNS Act, 1997.

2. I have heard the arguments at length from either side as well as gone through record with the help of learned officers of the Court appearing for the parties. From whatever argued and perused by me, I have gathered the following observation.

(a) That the allegation against the applicant are that during patrolling, the police party apprehended applicant/accused being suspected and search was conducted. From a shopper in the right hand of appellant 3340 grams charas as well as some currency notes from his pocket was recovered. Appellant was arrested and such memo was prepared at the spot which was subsequently incorporated in FIR.

(b) Counsel for applicant has questioned the arrest by ASI, which according to him is in violation of section 21 of CNS Act, 1997. In this respect it is worth noting that recovery was done during routine patrolling, as such compliance of Section 21 of CNS Act, is out of question.

(c) So far as delay in sending the sample is concerned, it will also not make out the case for bail as the chain of safe custody appears to be intact from the point of recovery to the receiving of the property in the office of chemical analyzer.

(d) It is also contended that the bearer was not examined as his 161, Cr.P.C. statement was not recorded. In this respect I am of the view that this aspect of the case is of deeper appreciation which cannot be entertained at this stage. So far difference in the number of pieces of recovered charas in FIR and chemical report is concerned, the same is also under deeper appreciation which will not be considerable at bail stage.

(e) Learned counsel tries to make it a great point that the quantity mentioned in challan is 30340 grams but the same is not considerable as it is typographical mistake, as explained by learned Prosecutor.

(f) It is also argued by counsel for the applicant that he was made a prey of enmity by some feudal lords but the name of such feudal lord neither quoted nor any document is placed to verify such enmity..

(g) In respect of non-observance of the procedure laid down under section 103, Cr.P.C. is concerned, it is settled law that the police officials are competent witnesses unless their competency is questionable due to some personal grudge or enmity. Since no animosity is mentioned during the course of arguments with the raiding police party, therefore, it is hard to believe that such huge quantity can be foisted upon the applicant.

3. In view of the above observation, I am confident to hold that the applicant/accused Khuda Bakhsh Khoso is not entitled for any concession at this stage, as such his bail application is declined.

SA/K-44/Sindh Bail declined.