' On 26-9-2002 complainant Muhammad Riaz Khan, S.H.O., Police Hashtnagri, Peshawar was on usual Gasht, when he received an information that a person will smuggle huge quantity of Charas from Illaqa Ghair to Punjab. Pursuant to this information the complainant deputed police officials near Bus Adda Roadways House, Peshawar. In the meanwhile at about 11-30 p.m. a man holding a shopping bag in his hand was seen going towards Adda. He was stopped and on inquiry he disclosed his name Muhammad Ilyas son of Muhammad Akbar, resident of Mohallah Rang Mahal, Zafarwal, Narowal. The shopping bag was opened and Charas was recovered therefrom. On weighment it was found 1500 grams. A small portion out of it was separated and sent to analyst for opinion and report. The remaining was sealed into a parcel. The petitioner was arrested and a case was registered against him at 11-50 p.m. Under section 9 of the Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997 ' (C.N.S.A.) vide F.I.R. No,852 dated 26-9-2002 Police Station Hashtnagri.
2. An application was moved on behalf of the petitioner before Additional Sessions Judge, Peshawar for grant of bail which was declined vide order dated 24-10-2002. Hence instant bail application.
3. Khanzada Ajmal Zeb Khan, Advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioner vehemently contended that prosecution is in possession of no material to connect the petitioner with the guilt and that despite prior information stated to have been received by the complainant no independent and disinterested witness has been associated with the recovery. He also contended that the petitioner is in jail ever since his arrest on 26-9-2002 and no useful purpose will be achieved in case of continuous detention of the petitioner in jail. To substantiate the pleas he placed reliance on Tahir v. The State 2000 PCr.LJ 949 (Peshawar), Nauroz Khan v. The State 2000 PCr.LJ 1222 (Peshawar) and Akhtar Hussain v. The State 1999 PCr.LJ 225.
4. In reply to the arguments of learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Abdur Rauf Gandapur learned State Counsel strongly opposed the bail application and contended with justification that there is sufficient evidence on the file to implicate the petitioner with the smuggling of Charas and that prima facie no case for grant of bail has been made out.
5. It is true that the complainant is claimed to have effected recovery on the basis of a prior information and no witness from the locality was associated with the recovery proceedings but it is equally true that the provisions of section 103, Cr.P.C. Have no application to the narcotics cases as per provision contained under section 25 of the C.N.S.A. 'The plea of non-compliance of formalities under section 103, Cr.P.C. Is not available to the petitioner. It is not denied that police officials are as good witnesses as any person from the public provided no animosity is alleged and proved against them. In the instant case there is nothing on the file to show that the petitioner has been falsely roped in due to ill-will or animosity of the police officials. Nasibullah v. The State 2002 M LD 241 (Quetta), Abdullah Shah v. The State 2002 PCr.LJ 1386.
6. In this case large quantity of Charas weighing 1500 grams has been recovered from immediate possession of the petitioner and he has been apprehended red-handed. Recovery memo. To this effect has been prepared at the spot which is duly witnessed by Abdur Rahim and Rafiullah F.Cs.
Stated to have accompanied the complainant at the time of apprehension of the petitioner and recovery of the Charas in question. The data collected by the prosecution is sufficient to provide reasonable ground for believing that a prima facie case existed against the petitioner. The application fails which is hereby dismissed and bait is refused to the petitioner. However, the prosecution shall submit complete challan against the petitioner within thirty days and the learned trial Judge shall decide the case as expeditiously as possible.