' SYED ZAWWAR HUSSAIN JAFFERY, J.---This petition, under Article 185(3) of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973, has been filed against the order dated 11-4-2008, passed by High Court of Sindh Karachi, whereby bail was granted to the petitioner-Qaiser Hafeez in the sum of Rs,100,000 with P.R. Bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of learned trial Court.
2. Brief facts of the case, leading to filing of this petition, are that on spy information that Ch. Muhammad Zahid, resident of Sahiwal, and his brother-in-law namely Ch. Muhammad Farooq were present in their house i,e, A-64, Tariq Bin Zayad Society, had brought huge quantity of heroin and are likely to hand over the same to some party in Dubai. A joint investigation team was constituted and raiding party in official vehicle, after making necessary entries in the concerned register, left the police station and raided the above mentioned house at Malir. While ringing bell of the main gate, a person opened the door who was taken into custody who disclosed his name Qaiser Hafeez, the petitioner herein. The raiding party further proceeded to drawing room and saw a person lying on the sofa set who disclosed his name as Imtiaz Khan son of Muhammad Aslam Khan, resident of Kohat. The raiding party inquired about Ch. Muhammad Zahid and his brother-in- law namely Ch. Muhammad Farooq. He informed the raiding party that Ch. Muhammad Zahid is present in bed room while Ch. Muhammad Farooq has 'already left for Punjab. Bed room was opened where Ch. Muhammad Zahid was found and upon search of his bed room three suitcases including one trolley bag were recovered. 15 packets from one suitcase, 40 packets from second suitcase and 24 packets from third suitcase were recovered while from the trolley bag 12 packets were recovered. All bags were containing heroin powder. Ch. Muhammad Zahid further led the raiding party to the adjacent room wherefrom ten hand bags of heroin of different quantity were also recovered. Consequently, the F.I.R. In the matter was lodged against the accused. After investigation, the challan was submitted in the court of competent jurisdiction. Respondent filed criminal bail application in the trial Court which was dismissed vide order dated 14-3-2008. Being aggrieved, he filed criminal bail application before the learned High Court of Sindh, Karachi, whereby bail was granted to the respondent vide order dated 11-4-2008. Hence, the State has filed the instant petition for cancellation of bail.
3. Mr. Niaz Ahmed Rathore, learned Prosecutor-General, Anti Narcotics Force; has submitted that the accused was arrested on the spot and huge quantity of narcotics was recovered from his possession; that the learned High Court has not taken into consideration section 51 of the Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997 in its true perspectives; that the respondent was not entitled to the grant of bail as the offence with which he was charged is punishable with death and that the respondent being domestic servant is supposed to have every knowledge about the happenings in the house as he is custodian of the house. Hence, bail granted to the respondent may be cancelled.
4. On the other hand, Mr. Zulfiqar Khalid Malouka, learned Advocate Supreme Court for the respondent, has supported the impugned order, opposed the contentions put forward by learned Prosecutor-General, Anti Narcotics Force and submitted that the evidence of six prosecution witnesses has been recorded and the respondent, after grant of bail by the learned High Court, is attending the proceedings before the learned trial Court and it will not be instrumental to cancel the bail of the respondent in conclusion of the trial.
5. We have heard Mr. Niaz Ahmed Rathore, learned Prosecutor-General, Anti Narcotics Force as well as Mr. Zulfiqar Khalid Malouka, learned counsel for the respondent, at considerable length and gone through the entire material available on record with their able assistance. Learned High Court of Sindh, Karachi while granting bail to the IA respondent has rightly observed as under:-- "There is no dispute that the applicant is not the domestic servant of the main accused; the contraband items have been recovered from the house in presence of the co-accused against' which the prosecution has alleged to have brought heroin and kept in his house and on his pointation said contraband substance has been recovered. No role has been attributed to the applicant except that he opened the door of the said house. Nothing more is on the record to connect him with the offence. In these circumstances, the case of the applicant requires further inquiry. Resultantly, he is granted bail in the sum of Rs, 100,000 with P.R. Bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court."
Since the trial Court has been proceeding with the case, examined six prosecution witnesses and the case is at the verge of conclusion, therefore, it would not be appropriate to cancel the bail of the respondent mere on technical grounds as he not abused the concession of bail at any time and facing the proceedings before the Court. The impugned order of learned High Court of Sindh is based on proper appreciation of material available on record. Learned counsel for the petitioner has not been able to pinpoint any infirmity or illegality in the impugned order meriting interference by this Court. No case for leave to appeal is made. However, learned trial Court is directed to conclude the trial of the case expeditiously preferably within a period of two months from the date of receipt of copy of this order and also communicate the progress of the day-to-day hearing through Registrar of this Court.
6. For the foregoing reasons, this, petition being devoid of merits is dismissed. Leave to appeal refused.