2017 PLP 355 (YLRN)

SHAHNAWAZ TARIQ, J.

Through captioned post-arrest bail application, applicant Adal Muhammad has impugned order dated 01.04.2016, passed by the Learned Judge Special Court-II (CNS), Karachi, whereby his earlier bail application was declined.

2. Relevant facts mentioned in FIR are that complainant Inspector Aftab Ahmed received a spy information on 13.02.2016 regarding transportation of huge quantity of Acetic Anhydride (prohibited chemical), consequently, he constituted a raid party and reached at Terminal Yard at about 1645 hours, and checked said container in presence of the raiding party and found 701 cartons and each carton was containing a Jerican of white color, and upon checking with the testing kit, 600 Jericans found containing acetic anhydride weighing 27 Kg, total weighing 16200 Kg. 10/10 grams chemical was taken as sample for the purpose of chemical analysis, hence instant FIR.

3. Learned counsel for applicant contended that applicant is innocent and has been falsely involved in present crime by the complainant and neither his name is transpired in FIR nor any specific role has been assigned to in Challan; that during investigation no documentary proof or any connecting evidence has been collected to prima facie implicate the applicant directly or indirectly in the alleged offence; that there are allegation of payment of Rs.24,00,000/- by the applicant to the co-accused Abdul Karim at the time of clearance of the consignment; that the applicant is behind the bars since 03.03.2016 and prosecution has failed to examine even a single witness against applicant; that complainant received spy information about the transportation of narcotics but no private person was associated to maintain the transparency of the alleged recovery.

4. While controverting the above arguments, learned Special Prosecutor ANF vehemently opposed the plea of bail, however, he candidly submitted that there are allegation against the applicant that he had paid Rs.24,00,000/- to co-accused Abdul Karim for clearance of consignment.

5. Heard arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties and perused the available record which emanates that complainant lodged instant FIR on receipt of spy information regarding transpiration of huge quantity of Acetic-Anhydride and per averments of FIR Muhammad Rafiq and Abdul Karim alias Abbu have imported container in the name of M/s. SMA Associates and during inspection of said container the alleged prohibited chemical was recovered. It is significant to mention that the name of the applicant is not mentioned in the FIR nor any specific rule has been assigned to him and even during the course of investigation neither any documentary proof nor other connecting evidence was collected to prima facie involve the applicant directly or indirectly in commission of offence. Indeed, there are mere allegations of payment of Rs.24,00,000/-by the applicant to co-accused Abdul Karim alias Abbu for release of the subject container, which requires serious consideration. It is well settled that while dealing the question of bail Court should examine the specific role assigned to the accused individually irrespective of heinousness of the offence committed by the co-accused and any slightest benefit of doubt should be extended in favour of accused. Admittedly, complainant received spy information regarding transportation of prohibited consignment and despite of a plenty of time, he neither made any serious efforts to hire any public person nor associated any private person to act as a mashir to maintain the transparency of recovery. After completion of investigation, Challan has been submitted and applicant is not required for investigation, hence his further detention will not serve any useful purpose.

6. Considering the facts and circumstances referred supra, applicant has succeeded to make out a case for grant of post-arrest bail on the ground of further enquiry as envisaged under subsection (2) of section 497 Cr.P.C. Consequently, applicant is admitted to post- arrest bail subject to his furnishing solvent surety in sum of Rs.200,000/- (Rupees two lacs only) with PR bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court. The observations made above are tentative in nature and trial Court shall decide the subject case purely on its merits. WA/A-164/Sindh Bail granted.