' Through this petition under Section 498, Cr.P.C. The petitioner has sought bail before arrest in FIR No, 01/15, dated 11.01.21315 registered at Police Station Directorate General Intelligence .& Investigation, FBR, Lahore in respect of offences under Sections 2(s) & 16 of the Customs Act, 1969.
2. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties at some length and have also gone through the record of this case with their able assistance. It has been noticed by me that the allegation leveled by the complainant against the petitioner in FIR is that he is indulged in smuggling articles of foreign made, i.e, Polypropylene PE (Plastic Dana) (LLDPE-0209AA) LH93260, Tabriz Petrochemical Co. Made in Iran and the article mentioned in copy of GD (produced by the driver and cleaner at the time of raid) was found mentioning 880 bags of Polyethylene (Grade HDPE-7000-F) brand
(MHPC) from Iran which article does not commensurate with the recovered article/Polyethylene. It is also alleged that the article is assessed having value of Rs, 43.95.000/-approximately which is a non-duty paid article. Admittedly on the asking of raiding party the driver and cleaner produced Bilty No, 0759, dated 07.01.2015 of Al-Quresh Enterprises and Consignor Sales Office, Lahore duly issued by Khushal Goods Transport Company Quetta alongwith copy of GD No, QDRY-HC-855, dated 10.12.2014 as well as release order dated 10.12.2014 and the petitioner owns all these documents inasmuch as he also owns recovered articles with the stance that he has not smuggled the disputed articles from Iran rather he has purchased the same from open market of Quetta. He has also showed readiness to produce purchasing documents/material to the Investigating Officer. In the backdrop of such circumstances whether the goods were actually smuggled by the petitioner or he has purchased the same from open market of Quetta is a matter of evidence which would be resolved after appreciating the same by the learned trial Court at an appropriate stage. During the course of arguments a question was put by the Court to the Investigating Officer that as the report under Section 173, Cr.P.C. Has already been submitted in the learned trial Court and trial is in progress, nothing is to be recovered from the petitioner then why his physical custody of is required for which the Investigating Officer has no answer. Admittedly investigation of this case is complete, the petitioner is previous non-convict, never involved in any other criminal case, therefore,, no useful purpose would be served by sending the petitioner behind the bars for a few days especially in . The circumstances when there is every likelihood that he would come out of jail on post-arrest bail.
3. For what has been discussed above this petition is, therefore, allowed and the ad-interim pre- arrest bail already allowed to the petitioner vide order dated 05.05.2015 is hereby confirmed subject to his furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs, 500,000/- (Rupees five hundred thousand only) with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court.