Irshad Masih alias Shahzad petitioner-accused seeks post arrest bail in case FIH No, 445/2011, dated 26.05.2011, under Articles 3 and 4 of the Prohibi ion (Enforcement of Hadd), Order, 1979, registered at Police Station City Jaranwala District Faisalabad with the allegation that on spy information, the petitioner was apprehended on 26.05.2011 at Sheikh Petrol Pump, Khurrianwala road Jaranwala, and on his personal search two Ponda (bottle) containing liquor were recovered and thereafter during interrogation, he led to the recovery of 103 Ponda containing liquor, from his house.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that case against the petitioner is false and fabricated; the offence under Article 3 of Prohibition (Enforcement of Hadd) Order, 1979 is not made out against the petitioner and the offence at the most is made out against the petitioner is under Article 4 of Prohibition (Enforcement of Hadd) Order, 1979 which is bailable and does not fall within the ambit of prohibitory clause of Section 497 (1), Cr.P.C.; that the petitioner is behind the bars and no more required by police for further investigation; that there is no progress the trial; that no sample of alleged recovered liquor has been sent to chemical examiner for analysis, so it cannot be ascertained that whether the recovered material intoxicant liquor or not, hence the petitioner is entitled to concession of bail.
3. On the other hand, learned Deputy Prosecutor General vehemently opposed the bail petition.
4. Arguments heard. Record perused.
5. Perusal of record reveals that allegedly 105 bottles of liquor were recovered from the petitioner.
Meaning thereby, the petitioner was only in possession of bottles of liquor, therefore, prima-facie the offence under Article 3 of Prohibition (Enforcement of Hadd) Order, 1979 is not made out and the offence which made out against the petitioner is under Article 4 of Order ibid and the same is bailable and also does not fall within the ambit of prohibitory clause of Section 497(1), Cr.P.C. Even otherwise no sample of alleged recovered liquor has been sent to the Chemical Examiner for analysis, therefore, it cannot be ascertained that the alleged recovered bottles were of intoxicant liquor or anything else. During the recovery proceedings provisions of Section 103, Cr.P.C. have been violated, which makes the prosecution story doubtful. The petitioner is behind the bars since his arrest i,e, on 26.05.2011 and no more required to the police for the purpose of investigation. The trial of the case is not in sight and keeping the petitioner behind the bars for an indefinite period would not serve any useful purpose of prosecution.
6. In view of the above, the case of the petitioner falls within the ambit of further inquiry under Section 497(2), Cr.P.C., therefore, he is admitted to post arrest bail subject to his furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs, 1,00,000/- (Rupees One lac only) with two sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of learned trial Court.