ABDUL HAMEED BALOCH, J.---Through this application, the applicant seeks bail in case FIR No.14 of 2018 registered with Police Station, ANF, Quetta on 18.09.2018 under Section 9(c) of the Control of Narcotics Substances Act, 1997 ("the Act").
Pertineht to mention here that earlier the application for same relief was turned down by the learned Special Court, CNS, Quetta vide order dated 19.02. 2019.
2. The brief facts as narrated in the FIR are that on the stated date time and place the complainant received spy information that applicant and co-accused Hikmatullah are coming in Rickshaw bearing registration No.RB-1047, for selling narcotics to their customers at Railway Patak Excise near Lehri, House, on this information he along with ANF officials proceeded in the official vehicles and reached at Railway Patak and made blockade, meanwhile the Rickshaw bearing No.1047 was attracted, which was intercepted and alighted the applicant along with co-accused.
On query , they disclosed their names as Abdul Rahim (applicant) and Hikmatulalh. After the search, 2 kilograms baked charas was allegedly recovered from the applicant and two kilograms of baked charas was allegedly recovered from co-accused Hikmatullah. It is further alleged that on disclosure and pointation of both the accused, 3400, grams wet opium was recovered from beneath the rear seat of Rickshaw .
3. Learned counsel for the applicant contended that if the alleged recovery of narcotics is presumed that it was recovered from personal possession of applicant/accused, he is not likely to be awarded maximum sentence provided by the Statute; that the accused/applicant is in custody since his arrest without any material proceeding in the case; that the applicant/accused after facing the investigation has been shifted to the judicial custody , and he is no more required for further investigation. He, therefore, urged for grant of bail to the applicant/accused.
4. The learned Special Prosecutor ANF strongly opposed the contention and prayed for dismissal of the application.
5. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have also gone through the record of the case. Record transpires that the recovery of two kilograms baked charas from possession of the applicant and recovery of 3400 grams opium from the Rickshaw is lacking independent corroboration. The prosecution is yet to prove the conscious knowledge of applicant about the allegedly recovered opium.
On the basis of tentative assessment of the material available on record, the case against the applicant falls within the ambit of further inquiry .
With regard to recovery of two (2) kilogram s charas from the possession of the applicant it is to be appreciated that the quantum of sentence has to be commensurate with the quantum of substance recovered, we doubt the applicant can be awarded maximum sentence for the alleged recovered charas provided by the Statue. It is imperative to mention here that the court while hearing, an application for bail is not to keep in view the maximum sentence provided by the Statute but the one which is likely to be entailed in the facts and circumstances of the case. Reliance in this regard is placed in the case Jamal-ud-Din alias Zubair Khan v . The State 2012 SCMR 573 .
The applicant/accused after facing the investigation has already been shifted to the judicial custody , thus his further detention does not serve any useful purpose.
For the above reasons, the interim bail granted to the applicant vide our short order dated 3.6.2019 is hereby confirmed.
Needless to mention that the observations made hereinabove are tentive in nature , shall not have any bearings on merits of case.