MUHAMMAD ZAHIR alias AKHTAR vs THE STATE

ORDER

1. ' MUHAMMAD ROSHAN ESSANI, J.---The facts leading to present application for bail are that applicant/accused Muhammad Zahir alias. Alchtar is facing trial in Special Case No,1460 of 2001, before the Special Court, Control, of Narcotics Substance, Karachi Division. The case arose out of F.I.R. N0.38 of 2001 of Police Station Clifton, Karachi.

2. ' The brief facts of the prosecution case as disclosed in the F.I.R. Lodged by Inspector Khaliduddin on 27-10-2001 are reproduced herein below in extenso: "Today, I, Inspector Khaliddin along with Inspector Ghulam Abbas, Police Constable Siraj Khap, Police Constable Shahid Raza, Police Constable Muhammad Ibrahim, Police Constables Ali Sher and Sajid Shah upon information proceeded in Official Vehicle No,GP.1191 to recover the narcotics and apprehend the culprits involved in drug trafficking, while we were present neat main road, Waseem Bagh, Gulshan-e-Iqbal for checking when one Car No,ADO-702. Baleno of gray colour came from Phatak side.

3. ' We signaled the inmates of the car to stop whereupon the driver of the vehicle accelerated the car but the car was stopped by us at some distance, by the side of road. In the vehicle three persons alongwith one boy were sitting. The by-passers were asked to act as witness but they declined, therefore, finding no other way-out, the members of the raiding party i,e, Inspector Ghulam Abbas and Police Constable Shahid Raza were made mashirs. On enquiry the person sitting on driving seat It\disclosed his name Hikmat lah son of 'Xbdullah Khan reside t of Shahbaz Town Koala Phatak, Quetta. His search was conducted and from the front side of the pocket of his shirt Rs,36,000 mobile phone, his N.I.C., few chits and visiting cards were recovered. The person sitting by the side of the driving seat disclosed his name Rehmatullah son of Dawood, resident of Shahbaz Town, Koala Phatak, Quetta. The boy was sitting in his lap, his name was disclosed as Sanaullah son of Hikmatullah. His personal search was conducted but nothing was recovered from him. The person sitting on the rear seat of the car disclosed his name Muhammad Zahir son of Muhammad Rafiq, resident of Khas Muhammad Gali. From the side pocket of nis snirt his original N.I.C. And mobile phone were recovered. On search of the car, from 'tne dashboard Photostat documents of the vehicle in the name of Hikmatullah were recovered and beneath the rear seat of the car four packets containing heroine powder were recovered. Each packet was separately weighed and found to be of one-kilogram heroin powder. One hundred grams of heroin was separated for chemical analysis and it was sealed separately. The remaining property was sealed and signatures of the witnesses were obtained thereon. The narcotic, cash and other articles recovered in the search were taken in custody under mashirnama. Formal investigation was made at the spot, which revealed that the heroin was brought from Jalahindar Khan, and the accused volunteered to his arrest. The memo. Of the arrest and recovery was prepared at the spot. It was read over to the witnesses, and in token of its correctness they put their signatures thereon, Accused Muhammad Zahir led the police party to the Ilnd 'Floor of flat, situated in Sadiq Memon Building, 13/D/3, where from at his pointation Jalahindar son of Ghalib was arrested. On his personal search Rs,1,000 were recovered. He admitted that four-Kgs. Heroin was given by him to Hikmatullah and Muhammad Zahir. The Mashirnama of his arrest was prepared and it was read over to the witnesses, who accepted the contents of the same to be correct and put their signatures thereon. The amount recovered from the accused Jalahindar was also taken in police custody under mashiranama.

4. ' Since the above act of accused comes within the purview of sections 6, 7, 8, 9, 12, 13, 14, 15 and 37 of the Control of Narcotics Substance Act, 1997, therefore, after registration of the case against the accused, I, Inspector, is conducting the investigation. Copies of F.I.R. Are sent to the concerned authorities."

5. ' The applicant/accused applied 'for bail before the trial Court by his bail plea was dismissed by impugned order dated 25-1-2002.

6. ' We have heard Mr. Mehmood A. Qurehsi, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant/accused. He has placed reliance on the cases of Abdul Jabbar and 2 others v. Nazim Khan and another reported in 1993 PCr.11 1. We have also heard Mr. Shoaib Ashraf, learned Special Public, Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the ANF Authorities.

7. The contention of Mr. Mehmood A. Qurehsi learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant/accused that during the course of investigation one Rehmatullah and Sanaullah were let off by the police, and the narcotic was recovered from the joint possession of the accused, therefore, his client is entitled to the grant of bail is misconceived.

8. ' The perusal of material placed on record shows that a large cache of narcotic i,e, 4 Kgs. Of heroin powder was recovered from the possession of applicant/accused and his companions, while they were going in a car.

9. ' In the case of Ghulam Rasool and 3 others v. The State, reported in 1979 SCM R 177. It was observed by the apex Court that merely because 13 persons out of 18 persons named in the F.I.R. Were let off by the police, during the course of investigation is no ground for grant of bail.

10. ' In another case of Muhammad Jan and 3 others v. The State, reported in 1979 SCM R 616, the bail was declined by the apex Court to the persons who were sitting in the truck from which some smuggled articles and narcotic were recovered.

11. ' In the case of Muhammad Gul v. The State reported in 2001 SCM R 71, bail plea in a narcotic case was dismissed by the Honourable Supreme Court and it was observed that the drug irafficking is 'a menace and problem for society at large.

12. The applicant/accused is facing charge under section 9-(c) of the Control of Narcotics Substances Act, 1997, section 51(1) of the Control of Narcotic Substances Act 1997 puts bar on the grant of bail.

13. ' Consequently, looking towards the peculiar facts and circumstances of the present case we are of the considered view that the present application for bait merits no consideration' and stands dismissed.