2003 PCr (PLP)

IJAZ AHMAD CHAUDHRY, J.

Through this application under section 498, Cr.P.C. petitioner seeks bail before arrest in case F.I.R. No.256, dated 30th September, 2001 registered at Police Station Gowal Mandi, Lahore under section 6-9(c) of Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997.

2. The brief allegations as per F.I.R. registered on the statement of Zaheer Ahmad, Sub-Inspector, C.I.A. Cantt., Lahore are that a secret information was received that international smuggler namely; Muhammad Asif son of the petitioner in order to transport huge quantity of narcotics to India has brought the same from `Adam Khel, which is stored at Nisbat Road. On the receipt of this information, a raiding party headed by complainant, and consisting of other police officials encircled the house. At about 1-30 p.m. Muhammad Asif son of the petitioner came out while he was in possession of plastic bag who was apprehended and when this plastic bag was weighed it was found, to have contained 19,000 grams (19 Kgs.) of Charas. 10 grams of Charas was separated from each packet.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that case is totally false and has been registered with mala fide intention, as an application was moved by the petitioner against said Zaheer Ahmad, Sub-Inspector to the Director, Anti-Corruption Punjab, Lahore on 2-7-2002. It is also contended that it is a case of no evidence and involvement of the son of the petitioner is not sufficient to connect the petitioner with the commission of the crime. It is also contended that there is no evidence that the petitioner was also dealing in narcotics and prays for the grant of bail. It is further submitted that statement of the co-accused has got no evidentiary value.

4. On the other hand, learned State Counsel on instruction has stated that the petitioner is involved in 18 cases in which recovery of narcotics has been effected. It is also contended that it is not a case of bail before-arrest and the offences fall within the prohibitory clause. It is further submitted that the petitioner remained fugitive from justice for a long period and is not entitled to any discretionary relief by this Court.

5. We have heard the arguments of both the learned counsel for the parties. The police during the investigation had collected material against the petitioner through inculpatory statement made by his son Muhammad Asif. According to him petitioner is also involved in narcotics business alongwith him. Admittedly the petitioner is residing in the same house from where 19 Kgs. of Charas was being taken away and was stored. The petitioner is previously involved in 18 cases of recovery of narcotics, and has tailed to show any reason for his false implication in this case or any mala fide on the part of the police. Moving of an application to Director, Anti-Corruption cannot be considered as there is no evidence that whether the application was actually moved by the petitioner to Anti Corruption prepared in order to create mala fide of the police. No case for bail before-arrest is made out on merits. Even otherwise, bail before arrest is meant to protect the innocent citizens from false implication by the police with mala fide intention and ulterior motives. The petitioner has failed to substantiate his plea of false implication. 5-A. For what has been discussed above, this application has no merits and is dismissed. H.B.T./P-143/L Bail application dismissed.