1. SHAHNAWAZ TARIQ, J.---Through captioned post arrest bail application, applicant Mst. Shahzadi alias Amirzadi has impugned order dated 22.09.2015, passed by the Court of learned Ist Additional Sessions Judge/Special Judge CNS, Khairpur, whereby her bail application was declined.
2. 2.Relevant facts spelt out from instant FIR are that on fateful day complainant Inspector Abdul Sattar Phul received spy information, apprehended three female culprits and recovered 1200 grams Charas from Mst. Shabana, 1330 grams Charas from Mst. Rukhsana and 1800 grams Charas from Mst. Shahzadi alias Amirzadi; hence instant FIR.
3. 3.Learned counsel for applicant contended that applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in instant case by the complainant, as applicant party was hari of one Shahbaz Dino and when they refused to cultivate his land, police, at his instance, has implicated applicant and her entire family in different cases; that on 06.02.2015, Jalaluddin Chandio husband of applicant, was apprehended in Crime No.21 of 2015, under section 23(i)(a) of Sindh Arms Act, and simultaneously, present applicant Mst. Shahzadi wife of Jalaluddin, Mst. Rukhsana daughter-in-law and Mst. Shabana daughter of applicant, have also been implicated in Crime No.20 of 2015 for recovery of Narcotics; that co-accused Mst. Shabana and Mst. Rukhsana have already been enlarged on bail by learned trial Court, while Jalaluddin has also been granted bail by the concerned Court in case of recovery of unlicensed pistol; that applicant is behind the bars for more than 10 months, but the prosecution has failed to conclude the trial in compliance of order dated 27.05.2015, passed by this Court in bail application No.227 of 2015; that per diary sheets of the main case available on record, on series of the dates, prosecution has failed to produce UTP before learned trial Court and case was also adjourned for want of attendance of PWs.
4. 4.Learned APG contended that applicant had withdrawn her earlier bail application as such she cannot agitate merits of the case in instant bail application; however on the ground of delay in the conclusion of trial, he extended no objection.
5. 5.I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record.
6. 6.Indeed, applicant Mst. Shahzadi wife of Jalaluddin along with her daughter Mst. Shabana and her daughter in law Mst. Rukhsana have been implicated by the police in the alleged offence on 06.02.2015, and on the same day, Jalaluddin husband of applicant, was also involved in a case of unlicensed pistol vide FIR No.21 of 2015 while both co-accused Mst. Shabana and Mst. Rukhsana have already been enlarged on bail by learned trial Court. There is no criminal record of the applicant and even she was never challaned in any criminal case. The averments of FIR are silent that in which shape alleged Charas was recovered and there is no mention that 9 pieces of Charas were secured from the possession of applicant, however, Chemical Examiner has mentioned that 09 pieces of Charas were received by him. The recovered Charas was also not weighed at the spot and total weight was mentioned approximately, which required serious consideration.
7. 7.Investigation has already been completed and applicant is no more required further for investigation and her further detention will not serve any useful purpose and bail cannot be withheld as matter of punishment. Vide order dated 27.5.2015, this Court in Bail Application No.S-227 of 2015,had directed learned trial Court to conclude the trial within a period of 03 months; however due to non-production of UTP and non-availability of witnesses, trial could not be concluded within time and after lapse of 06 months not a single witness has been examined by the prosecution.
8. 8.It is significant to mention here that earlier Bail Application No. 227 of 2015 filed by applicant was not argued by the defence counsel as same was simply not pressed in view of the directions issued to the trial Court to conclude the trial within stipulated period of three months, hence applicant could not bedebarred from agitating the merits of the case.
9. 9.The facts and circumstances of the case emanate that head of the family Jalaluddin Chandio was arrested on 06.08.2015 in the case of recovery of one unlicensed TT pistol, while on the same day, his entire family i.e. his wife, daughter and daughter-in-law were arrested by the complainant on receipt of spy information from the main road and despite prior information neither he associated any independent witness nor he made any serious efforts to hire public person to maintain the transparency of recovery. The plea raised by the defence regarding involvement of entire family due to their refusal to cultivate land of their landlord Shahbaz Dino also requires serious consideration. It is well settled that irrespective of heinousness of the crime, any iota of doubt even at bail stage shall be counted in favour of accused. Applicant being a lady of old age is also entitled for concession of bail.
10. 10.Considering the above facts and circumstances, applicant has succeeded to make out a case for grant of bail on the ground of further inquiry as envisaged in section 497(2), Cr . P C .
11. Consequently, applicant is admitted to post-arrest bail subject to her furnishing solvent surety in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand) and P.R. bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of learned trial Court.
12. 11.The above observations are tentative in nature and learned trial Court shall decide the case purely on merits. revisions by the competent authorities. Therefore, it is advisable to consult the official sources or legal professionals for the most up-to-date and accurate information.