MOHAMMAD IBRAHIM KHAN, J. The contents of the murasila are that on 14.05.2022 complainant Muhammad Saeed Khan SI on spy information stopped a white color GLI motorcar bearing registration No.LEH-4753 coming from Peshawar side. The driver disclosed his name Muhammad Imtiaz. On search of motorcar, 02 packets of heroin weighing 1000/1000 total 2000 grams were recovered from its secret cavities in the front doors hence, the present FIR.
2. Accused-petitioner Muhammad Imtiaz son of Muhammad Boota seeks his release on bail in case FIR No. 728 dated 14.05.2022 under section 9-D CNSA registered at Police Station City Chamkani Peshawar.
3. Record transpires that this is the third application for grant of bail to the accused-petitioner. The first application moved before the learned' Additional Sessions Judge-XIV/JSC, Peshawar was dismissed on 25.0.2022, which was later on assailed before this Court and vide order dated 20.06.202 passed in Cr.M. (B.A.). No. 1572-P/2022, it was disposed of by directing the learned trial Court to conclude the trial within four months however, the same v. as not concluded in the stipulated period. In the second round, another application was moved on the same grounds which was turned down not only by the learned trial Court but also by this Court vide order dated 12.08.2022 passed in Cr. M. (B.A.) No. 182-P/2022. Thereafter, the petitioner seeking his fortune, preferred a petition before the august Supreme Court of Pakistan which was dismissed vide order dated 16.09.2022 passed in Criminal Petition No.136-P of 2072 and their lordships Hon'ble Judges of the Supreme Court expressed surprise over filing of fresh petition therein. In the third round, another application was filed before the learned Trial Court which was also dismissed on 25.10.2022; same has now been challenged before this Court through this application.
4. Learned counsel for petitioner requested the Court to decide this bail application on merits. True, every application should be decided on its own merits but when learned counsel for petitioner requests that an application may be disposed of in terms of directing the learned trial Court to conclude the trial within certain time then if at all, same has not been concluded for reasons best known to the learned trial Court obviously; such application may be entertained on merits. Learned counsel for petitioner placed reliance on judgments cited as 2022 SCMR 1271 titled Muhammad Ijaz v. The State and others 2021 SCMR 1458 titled Amjid Khan v. The State through A.G Khyber Pakhtunkhwa and others PLD 2021 Supreme Court 795 titled Gul Rehman v. The State through AG KP Peshawar and 2018 MLD (Lahore) 720 titled Salmon Akhtar alias Salmani v. The State and another.
5. In view of above, learned counsel for petitioner and learned A.A.G. on behalf of the heard today while judgment/ order of this Court dated 20.06.2022 is recalled.
6. Record transpires that accused-petitioner has been shown arrested red handedly from the driving seat and huge quantity of contraband/heroin weighing 2000 grams were recovered from the secret cavities made in the front door of the vehicle in question which was in exclusive possession and control of the accused-petitioner. Prima facie it seems that the accused-petitioner was in conscious knowledge of the availability of contraband in the vehicle. So far as arguments of learned counsel for petitioner that the FIR No. 718 instated of FIR No. 728 in the card of arrest of accused-petitioner is concerned, in this respect Javed Muhammad, Inspector, Investigation Officer of the case appeared before the court on 29.07.2022, who plainly admitted his fault by mentioning the wrong FIR No. 718 instead of 728 on the card of arrest of accused hence, learned counsel for the petitioner may agitate this point before the learned trial court during recording of prosecution evidence, which at this bail stage is not favourable to the accused-petitioner. Statements of recovery proceedings recorded under section 161, Cr.P.C., support the version of the Seizing Officer.
On the face of record, the PWs have no ill will or enmity with the petitioner. Positive FSL report of the heroin further supports the prosecution version. The punishment provided for the offence falls within the prohibitory clause of section 497, Cr.P.C. No case of further inquiry has been made out by the accused-petitioner for the grant of bail.
7. In view of the above, this petition stands dismissed.