1989SCMR269 (PLP)

SHAFIUR RAHMAN, J.‑‑Mst. Yasmeen, the Petitioner has been refused bail twice by the High Court of Sind and she seeks leave to appeal against the second order dated 11th of July, 1988 whereby bail was refused to her the second time. ~ On the 31st of March, 1988 the Sanghar Police organized a raid on the house of one Nabi Bakhsh who managed to escape in the sight of the Police Party surrounding the house but the Petitioner was found inside and it is alleged that at her instance a number of articles contraband and others were recovered. The Petitioner and the absconder were charged under sections 3 and 4 of the Hudood Ordinance for possessing Hasheesh (12 K.G.), Heroin (1‑1/2 K.G.) and Opium(1-1/2 K.G.). In seeking bail the Petitioner had plea(' l that she was physically infirm and pregnant, and being a woman was entitled to the concession of bail. The civil Surgeon certified her to be physically and mentally fit but she was pregnant of about five months. The Sessions Judge last rejected her bail on 22‑6‑19c88 and the High Court on 11‑7‑1988. The earlier application of the Petitioner had failed in the High Court for the reason given hereunder:‑‑ "Mr. MA. Kazi, learned counsel appearing for the applicant states that he will not press this application for the time being as the case has not yet proceeded, and that he has not been able to lay hands on certain important documents. In view of the above statement the application is dismissed for the time being as withdrawn." The subsequent application was dismissed by the impugned order observing as follows:‑ "Mr. Muhammad Ismail, learned counsel appearing for the applicant has, contended that the applicant is pregnant and is confined in a solitary cell where no other lady is available. I am sorry this ground was available even to the learned counsel who had moved first application which was withdrawn on 25‑5‑1988. No fresh ground has been urged. In view of the Supreme Court decision in P L D 1986 S C 173 learned counsel cannot be considered as a fresh ground. The application is, therefore, dismissed." Notice had been given to the State on 4th of August, 1988 when by an order she was admitted to interim bail furnishing one surety in the sum of Rs. 1,00,000 (one lac) and on executing personal bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Sessions Court, Sanghar. We have converted this petition into an Appeal after hearing the learned counsel for the parties. The Petitioner was an inmate of the house from where recoveries were made. She is a young lady and is reported to be pregnant also. The pregnancy now is according to the reports‑on‑record at an advanced stage. We consider her entitled to clam that the child to whom she gives birth is born free and not in prison. Besides, she necessarily requires medical care and attention. In the circumstances, we confirm the interim bail in the terms already granted. M.Y.H./Y‑14 S Bail confirmed.