Petitioner Alamgir seeks bail in case FIR No, 275 dated 8.3.2012 registered for offence u/S. 9(c) CNSA at Police Station Bana Mari District Peshawar.
2. The local police of Bana Mari received information to the effect that on Ring Road near Mujaddid CNG, a truck bearing Registration No, E-3979 was standing being out of order containing narcotics.
Believing the same to be true, they proceeded to the spot where the said truck was found standing and claimed ownership by the petitioner. Search was carried out of the truck wherefrom its secret cavities 48 KGs of chars was recovered, which was taken into possession, hence the case was registered against the accused.
3. Learned counsel for petitioner contended that the recovery has not been effected from personal or exclusive possession of the petitioner, therefore, he cannot be linked with the crime; that the petitioner was enroped on the basis of being standing near the truck, therefore, it was presumed that he was the person who was carrying the narcotics, which allegation cannot hold the field as nothing was recovered from him upon his personal search and that he was not in conscious knowledge regarding presence of narcotics therein, thus, on the above premises it was argued that the case of petitioner is one of further inquiry.
4. On the other hand, learned State counsel while opposing this petition contended that huge quantity of narcotics has been recovered from the truck ownership whereof has been claimed by the petitioner, moreso, when he was directly charged in the FIR and was arrested on the spot, therefore, in this view of the matter, the accused/petitioner is not entitled to the concession of bail.
Arguments heard. Record perused.
5. Albeit huge quantity of narcotics has been recovered from the truck and at the relevant time the petitioner was found standing near the same but the record reveals that he is neither driver nor conductor/cleanser of the truck, therefore, on mere presumption he cannot be tagged with the alleged crime. No recovery of narcotics has been effected from personal or exclusive possession of the petitioner, therefore, the question of his conscious knowledge regarding presence of narcotics in the truck would be dealt with by the learned trial Court. Additionally, the petitioner has never been seen by the informer or any other person loading or unloading the truck, hence on mere presumption and assumption he cannot be connected with instant crime. Moreover, during the investigation, it came to limelight that the narcotics so recovered was owned by accused Muhammad Rafique son of Niamat Gul resident of Khyber Agency, therefore, when the petitioner is neither driver nor cleanser/conductor of the truck and when the said accused claimed ownership of narcotics, which fact has been established during the investigation, thus, in the given circumstances case for further inquiry is made out. Let the prosecution answer the above lacunas in the trial but till stage comes, the petitioner cannot be kept behind the bars for indefinite period.
This petition was allowed vide short order of even date and above are reasons for the same.