' SALIM KHAN, J.--- Vide F.I.R. No,136, dated 8-5-2005 based on the Murasila of Ishfaq Ahmad Khan S.H.O. Of Police Station Zaida, District Swabi, the present petitioner, Taj Muhammad son of Gul Muhammad, was hauld up while driving Motor-car No,1244. On search of switchboard of the said car, five packets containing five kilograms Charas were recovered. The accused-petitioner was then formally arrested.
2. The learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the contraband Charas was neither recovered at the pointation of the accused-petitioner nor directly from his possession, that the petitioner did not have the knowledge about the same otherwise he would have either attempted to decamp or to show his wrong name and address. He further contended that there was delay in the submission of complete challan and the accused-petitioner could not be held behind the bars for inefficiency of the prosecution. He was of the view that freedom and liberty of the petitioner was more important than the officialdom of members of the prosecution, and it was the inalienable right of the petitioner to be free unless there was proof of guilt against him. He also contended that the report of F.S.L. Had not been received and that it was not expected in the circumstances of the case that, if convicted, the maximum punishment would be granted to the accused-petitioner. He relied on:--
(1) 1998 NLR SD 45; (2) 1996 PCr.LJ 116; (3) PLD 1996 Kar. 557; (4) PLD 1972 SC 277; (5) PLD 1996 SC 504;
(6) 2005 PCr.LJ 1245; (7) Judgment in Criminal Bail Application No,1315 of 2003; (8) Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No,508 of 2004; (9) Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No,851 of 2004 and (10) Criminal Miscellaneous Bail +Application No,1195 of 2005.
3 . The learned D.A.-G. Produced the F.S.L. Report which was received and in which the contraband material contained in sample has been shown as contraband Charas. He was of the view that the police officials were as good witnesses as private persons, that delay in the submission of sample was not fatal to the prosecution case when the recovery was denied by the defence, that the contraband Charas has been recovered from the switchboard of the motor-car which was driven by the petitioner and the complete challan was prepared on 6-7-2005, but could not be submitted to the Court as the file was requisitioned on the bail application of the petitioner.
4. The occurrence is dated 8-5-2005. The F.S.L. Report has been received but with the delay. The complete challan could be submitted to the learned trial Court in accordance with the provisions of law well within time, or immediately after that. The accused-petitioner has already spent more than four months behind the bars. It is not argued that the accused-petitioner is expected to abscond if he is released on bail through sufficient bail bond through local, reliable and men of financial means sureties. The prosecutions have the chance to submit bail cancellation petition to the competent Court if the petitioner does not follow the conditions of bail bond.
5. I, therefor, order the release of the accused-petitioner on bail on his furnishing bail bond in the sum of Rupees one lac (Rs,1,00,000 only) with two sureties, each surety in the like amount, to the satisfaction of the learned Judge of the trial Court, who shall ensure that the sureties are local, reliable persons and men of enough financial means.