' Applicant Imran Amin seeks bail in a case (F.I.R. No,6 of 1999 Police Station A.N.F.-II, Karachi) registered against him for offences under section 6/9 of the Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997, pending trial before the Court of learned Special Judge (Anti-Narcotics), Karachi East.
2. Prosecution case briefly stated is that on 1-5-1999 during investigation of Crime No,5 of 1999 by S.-I. Khaliduddin of Police Station A.N.F.-II, Karachi, accused Shakeel Ahmed disclosed to him that the case property narcotics was placed in his house by the applicant Imran and if Imran is arrested, further recovery would be possible. On such disclosure, it is said, a raiding party was formed consisting of Mehmood Baig, Assistant Director and A.S.-I. Ghulam Murtaza and P.C.
Muhammad Siraj for the purpose. Accordingly, the raiding party happened to arrest a person as pointed out, by Shakeel Ahmed alias Nimaish Chorangi who disclosed his name as Imran Amin (present appellant) and on his search five "Patees" of Charas weighing 1 Kg. Each were secured in presence of abovenamed Ghulam Murtaza and Muhammad Siraj as the passersby had reportedly refused to become Mashirs. One hundred grams from each Patee were taken out for Chemical Examination and report. Besides narcotics rupees two hundred were allegedly secured from the applicant, who after completion of usual investigation, was challaned as stated above.
3. It is argued by Mr. M. Ilyas Khan learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant was falsely implicated. He was named by accused Shakeel Ahmed (in case F.I.R. No,5 of 1999) in his judicial confession after 22 days. In fact the applicant was arrested from Karachi Airport on 23-4-1999 when the applicant alongwith two other friends were proceeding by P.I.A. To Gawader for purpose of employment. He argued that section 51 of the C.N.S. Act, 1997 would not be applicable in this case as the offence does not call for penalty of death. He further argued that the prosecution story was false and cooked up. The applicant was already in custody of the complainant party. Learned counsel has produced P.I.A. Tickets and press clippings in support of his submissions. He placed reliance upon 2000 SCM R 677, PLD 1996 SC 241, 1998 PCr.LJ 128 and PLD 1993 SC 473.
4. On the other hand Mr. Shoaib M. Ashraf learned Special Prosecutor for the (A.N.F.) State argued that the applicant was a drug trafficker. The quantity of narcotics secured from the possession of the applicant indicates that he was taking away the same for some commercial purpose. The prosecution witnesses had no animosity against the applicant. He further argued that the offence is punishable up to death sentence and there is a prohibition on release on bail of such accused.
He placed reliance upon PLD 1996 SC 632.
5. Mr. Ilyas Khan has referred to law on press reports and general principles relating to administration of criminal justice. Other cases referred to by the learned counsel relate to cases which are different and distinguishable from the case in hand. Mr. Shoiab M. Ashraf, learned Special Prosecutor has also referred before us the law relating to press reports.
6. Prosecution case prima facie discloses commission of a cognizable offence punishable with sentence up to death. The main thrust of the contentions raised on behalf of the applicant is that he has been falsely implicated. There is in our opinion substantial accusation against the applicant. The press cuttings do not overweigh the prosecution allegations. We are unable to form the view that the applicant's case falls within the ambit of section 497(2), Cr.P.C. Hence we decline bail. We would, however, direct the learned trial Court to proceed with the applicant's case as expeditiously as possible.
7. Bail application was dismissed on 3-6-2000 by a short order. These are the reasons for the same.