MUHAMMAD BILA vs STATE
The petitioner filed a bail application in a case registered under Sections 6 and 9 of the Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997, following his arrest for allegedly possessing 50 kilograms of 'Tosst'. The petitioner, a minor aged approximately 13-14 years, contended that he was physically incapable of carrying such a heavy load and that the case was mala fide. The prosecution alleged that the petitioner confessed to carrying the bag at his father's request for delivery to a third party. The Court observed that the prosecution failed to associate the petitioner's father or the intended recipient in the investigation. Finding it prima facie implausible that a minor of the petitioner's physique could transport such a heavy quantity of narcotics, the Court held that the petitioner's guilt required further inquiry. Consequently, the bail petition was allowed, and the petitioner was ordered to be released upon furnishing bail bonds, as the circumstances raised sufficient doubt regarding the prosecution's version of events to warrant relief pending trial.
- Does the failure of the prosecution to investigate the alleged co-accused or persons named in a confession statement constitute grounds for further inquiry in a bail application?
- Is the physical capacity of an accused to carry the recovered contraband a relevant factor for the court to consider when deciding a bail petition?
- Should bail be granted when the prosecution's narrative regarding the circumstances of the recovery appears prima facie implausible?
- Section 6, Control of Narcotic Substances Act 1997
- Section 9, Control of Narcotic Substances Act 1997
ORDER
Petitioner seeks bail in a case registered vide FIR No, 439 dated 22.12.2003 under Sections 6/9 of the CNSA at Police Station Batapur, Lahore. The prosecution story is that on a source report to the effect that at the bus stand a huge quantity of Tosst' is likely to arrive, a raid was conducted and the police party found petitioner de-boarding a bus carrying a bag. He was arrested and when the bag was opened it contained Tosst' weighing 50-kilo grams.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner seeks bail on the grounds that the petitioner is between 13/14 years .of age, that a body of this age is even otherwise incapable of carrying a bag weighing 50- kilo grams, that the case has been registered for malafide reason and that petitioner is not involved in any other criminal case. Learned counsel for the State opposes the petition by submitting that the offence alleged is serious in nature and that no case for bail is made out. He, however, does not deny that the petitioner is about 14 years of age.
3. Heard.
4. As per the prosecution the afore-referred bag was recovered from the petitioner, who in his statement recorded before the police allegedly admitted to have carried the bag at the asking of his father to be delivered it to one Muhammad Shafique. It is conceded before this Court by the learned State counsel that neither petitioner's father nor the afore-referred Muhammad Shafique were made to joint the investigation. Prima facie it is repellent to common sense a minor of petitioner's age and physique could carry such a heavy bag. The non-association of petitioner's father and the person to whom the bag was to be delivered makes the question of petitioner's guilt a matter of further inquiry. In the afore-referred circumstances this petition is allowed and subject to furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs, 50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand only) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court, he shall be released on bail.