The petitioner seeks post arrest bail in a case registered against him vide FIR No, 263/11 dated 18.4.2011 at Police Station Chehlyak District Multan under Section 9-C, Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997.
2. Allegedly the petitioner during investigation of case FIR No, 262/11 under Sections 506/353/186 PPC made a disclosure and led to the recovery of heroin weighing 1521 grams from his house.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that the petitioner was roped in the false case bearing FIR No, 165/11 under Sections 223, 224 PPC read with Article 155-C of Police Order, 2002 as the persons responsible for the escape of the accused persons were Fazal Inspector, Saeed Head Constable and Muhammad Iqbal ASI and he disclosed their names to the superior officers so firstly he was involved in ease FIR No, 262/11 under Sections 186, 353, 506 PPC and then in the instant case. It is urged that in an application under Section 491 Cr.P.C. his father had categorically mentioned on 18.4.2011 during Court hours that the police officers have kept him under illegal detention at some unknown place and the SHO has given a threat that the petitioner would be involved in a case of heinous nature under Control of Narcotic Substances Act. It is urged that this application was moved before 3-00 p.m. in any case, whereas the instant case was registered on the same day at about 8.15 p.m. so the malice is apparent on face of record. It is urged that this contention is also verified from the fact that after grant of bail before arrest by the learned Additional Sessions Judge he appeared before the SHO to join the investigation of the case but he was roped in case FIR No, 262/11.
4. The learned Additional Prosecutor General has vehemently opposed the petition. It is contended that the petitioner has facilitated the narcotics dealers responsible for smuggling of huge quantity of chars so case FIR 165/11 was registered against him but when he appeared in the Police Station, he extended threats to the police employees and also grappled with Constable Ghulam Hussain.
5. Order dated 18.4.2011 passed by learned Additional Sessions Multan shows that the Bailiff was deputed by the Court to recover the detenue so this application must have been filed during Court hours. In the said application, it was specifically alleged by the father of the petitioner that he went to the Police Station to join the investigation of Case No, 165/11 but as he wanted to disclose the names of the actual culprits responsible for escape of the accused persons he was kept under illegal detention and the SHO extended a threat that he would be involved in a case of heinous nature under Control of Narcotics Substance Act if any officer was named. The father of the petitioner would have no knowledge about the registration of the case at that time so his allegation cannot be ignored. This fact alone is sufficient to 4 conclude that the case against the petitioner needs further probe and inquiry and his involvement in the commission of the offence appears to be doubtful.
6. For the reasons supra the petition is accepted and petitioner is admitted to bail in the sum of Rs, 100,000/- with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court.