1994 P Cr (PLP)

2.Applicant Sultan Salahuddin is accused in Case No.P-684 of 1993, F.I.R. of which was registered on 16-3-1993 under section 156(1)(8) of Customs Act, 1969 for alleged smuggling of gold as defined under section 2(s) of the said Act. He applied for bail and his such application is rejected by the learned Special Judge (Customs and Taxation) by order, dated 31-3-1993. The allegation as contained in the F.I.R. is that the Seizing Officer, Mansoor Farooqi, who was performing evening duty at International Arrival Hall, Jinnah Terminal Complex, Quaid-e-Azam International Airport, Karachi, was directed to examine the baggage of a passenger, namely, Sultan Salahuddin (present applicant) who was intercepted on the basis of an information. The information received was to the effect that a person who arrived from Dubai by Flight No.PK-214 was carrying two bags containing gold. After interception of the passenger, he was required to declare if he was carrying contraband items in his baggage, and the reply was in the negative. Being dissatisfied with such declaration by the passenger, the baggage was inspected in presence of Mashirs Bashir Ahmad and Ahmad Gul and from the said baggage 23 gold slabs concealed in V.C.P., door bells and bottles of facial cream in one suit-case and 27 gold slabs concealed in fancy ceiling fan and other items from the other suit case were recovered, total number of slabs being

50. The passenger (the applicant) was arrested and served with a notice under section 171 of the Customs Act. It is contended by the learned Advocate for the applicant that the two suit-cases from which the gold concealed in various items were recovered, did not belong to the applicant, as the baggage tags, the counterfoils of which are to be in possession of a passenger were not recovered from applicant. Thus, it cannot be said that the two suit-cases belonged to the applicant/passenger. It is further contended that in the challan submitted before the trial Court, applicant is classified as a carrier. In support of such contentions and having argued that the case of applicant in these circumstances will be of further enquiry, the learned Advocate placed on record photostat copies of bail orders in Special Criminal Bail Application No.96 of 1987 and in Special Criminal Bail Application No.725 of 1989. In the first case gold weighing 100 Tolas was recovered from the passenger and the baggage tags on the baggage bore different numbers than the counterfoil of the tags secured from the passenger. A learned Judge of this Court held that the case called for further enquiry and bail was granted. In the second case, gold weighing 130 Tolas was recovered from a passenger who was apprehended while going out of the hall after examination of his baggage and payment of taxes. Since the gold was recovered after such examination and payment of, duty and taxes, a learned Judge of this Court held that it was a matter of doubt, calling for further enquiry within the meanings of subsection (2) of section 497, Cr.P.C. and bail was granted.

3. Mr. Farukh Zia Shaikh, Advocate appearing for the State has opposed the grant of bail and has argued that since the bags were being carried by applicant himself there was no question of any counterfoils of the baggage tags having not been found in possession of the accused. It is further argued that applicant was, in fact, a carrier for Maqsood Ali and Masood Ali who were the real beneficiaries. Since a very huge quantity of gold was recovered from the baggage which belonged to the accused, contravention of section 2(s) of the Customs Act is established and the punishment provided under law attracts the prohibitory clause of section 497 of Cr.P.C. which would not entitle applicant to grant of bail. I have heard the learned counsel at length and perused the record as well as the copies of orders in two bail applications submitted by applicant's learned Advocate. It is not disputed by the learned counsel for the State that no baggage tags similar to the one on the baggage were recovered from the applicant. In the challan he is shown as a carrier and the law is quite settled I that the case of a carrier is to be dealt with on lighter footing than the case of IE the actual beneficiary. These circumstances make applicant's case of further enquiry and I am inclined to grant him bail. Applicant Sultan Salahuddin shall be released on bail if he furnishes one surety in the sum of Rs.5,00,000 (Rupees five lac) with P.R. Bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court. N.14.Q./S-1050/K Bail granted.