1. Through this revision application the applicant has called in question the legality and propriety of order, dated 11-2-2006, whereby learned Special Judge, Control of Narcotic Substances, Hydehbad, declined the application for withdrawal of case moved by District Attorney.
2. 2.Precisely stated the facts are, that the applicant is facing trial in Special Case No, 37 of 2002, registered vide Crime No, 11 of 2002, by Excise Crime Branch, Hyderabad, under Section 9(c), Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997. After recording of some evidence, application under Section 494, Cr.P.C. was moved by District Attorney, Hyderabad, seeking permission for withdrawal of the case against the applicant. After hearing the arguments said application was dismissed by the trial Court inter alia holding that withdrawal of narcotics case was against public policy, and that there was no Notification issued by Government. Hence this revision application.
3. 3.At the outset learned counsel appearing for the applicant has prayed for transfer of the case from the Sessions Judge/Special Judge, C.N.S. Hyderabad in view of the fact that he has given certain observations which are bound to prejudice the case of the applicant.
4. 4.Learned Additional Advocate-General, Sindh has stated no objection to the transfer of the case.
5. 5.On consideration of the submissions made before us and examining the impugned order, we are of the view that the order impugned in this revision application whereby the learned trial Court declined to grant permission to the prosecutor for withdrawal of the case is supported by cogent reasons. There appears no straightforward justification to disturb the order passed by the trial Court as the same is neither illegal nor improper. Consequently, the view taken by the trial Court is upheld.
6. 6.However, on perusal of the impugned order we find that learned trial Judge has made certain observations touching the merits of the evidence which are sufficient to create apprehension in the mind of the accused/applicant, that he may feel prejudiced. Following the well-known maxim that the justice should not only be done but should be seen to have been done, we would order withdrawal of Special Case 'To. 37 of 2002 (State v. Muhammad Hayat) from the Court of Sessions Judge/Special Judge, Hyderabad. The same shall consequently be transferred to the Court of IInd Additional Sessions Judge/Special Judge, Control of Narcotic Substances, Hyderabad who shall proceed further with the case in accordance with law.