2014 PLP 37 (YLR)

SHAKIL AHMED BALOCH, J.

This bail application is directed against the impugned order dated 7th August, 2013, passed by the learned Special Judge, Control of Narcotic Substances Act, Balochistan, Quetta. The applicants are facing trial for offence under sections 9(c), 14 and 15 of the Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997, registered at Police Station A.N.F., Quetta vide F.I.R. No. 42 of 2013.

2. Brief facts of the case are that a spy information was received that a huge quantity of narcotics and liquor are being smuggled from the house of the applicants situated at Lore Karez, Munir Ahmed Mengal Road, Quetta. Upon such information, a raiding party headed by Subedar Muhammad Khalid along with Lance Naik Hashmat Ali, Constable Zulfiqar Ali, Driver Khudai Nazar and a lady constable raided the house, where 1500 Grams of Charas and 1424 bottles of liquor as well as 1400 tins of beer were recovered from the possession of the applicants/accused. The accused persons were arrested and the F.I.R. was lodged accordingly.

3. The learned counsel for the applicants contended that the applicants are innocent and have wrongly been implicated in the instant case. No independent witness has been associated during the alleged recovery and thus has violated the provision of section 103 of the Cr.P.C. Neither the house belongs to the applicants nor they were arrested from the same. The counsel for the applicants further contended that the applicant Safiullah is a juvenile and the trial Court did not consider this aspect.

4. On the other hand the learned Special Prosecutor A.N.F. vehemently opposed the contention of the learned counsel for the applicants. The learned Special Prosecutor stated that the F.I.R. has been registered under section 9(c), 14 and 15 of Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997, which come within the prohibitory clause of section 497, Cr.P.C. He further contended that there are sufficient material available on record connecting the applicants with the commission of the offence, as such, they are not entitled for the grant of bail in a non-bailable offence.

5. I have heard the learned counsel for the applicants as well as the learned Prosecutor A.N.F. and perused the record. The accused/applicants are nominated in the F.I.R. with a specific role attributed to them that a huge quantity of narcotics (Charas) were recovered from their possession. The case against the applicants prima facie attracts the provision of sections 6, 7 and 8, punishable under section 9(c) of the C.N.S., Act, 1997, for which the punishment is provided to death, imprisonment of life or 14 year's.

6. The contention of the learned counsel for the applicants that the provision of section 103, Cr.P.C. have been violated has also no force. In view of the fact that in narcotics cases the provision of section 103, Cr.P.C. is excluded pursuant to section 25 of the Act. As far as the age of the applicant No.2 is concerned. No authentic documents have been produced by the learned counsel for the applicant, however, this fact may be determined by the trial court, if agitated. In view of above, the applicants/ accused are not entitled for the concession of bail, consequently, the application is rejected. HBT/96/Bal Bail refused.