CH. IFTIKHAR HUSSAIN, ].-- Nazir Ahmad petitioner has prayed for post-arrest bail in case F.I.R. No. 286, registered on 10.7.2001 under Section 9(c) of Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997, with Police Station, Sadar, Vehari.
2. Briefly, the prosecution case as per F.I.R, is that on 10.7.200I at about 8.15 p.m. Raees Ahmad an accused in case F.I.R. No. 285/2001 of that Police Station had disclosed during the investigation that he had purchased Charai from Nazir Ahmad and Muhammad Aslam, On this disclosure, Abdu!
Sattar, S.I. Constituted a raiding party and on his Plantation, a raid was conducted at the dera of one Saif Uiiah in the area of Chak No. 3/WB. Nazir Ahmad, who was present there, managed good his escape, hiding himself in the crops, while Muhammad Aslam who was trying to flee therefrom with a bag, was apprehended. On opening the bag, the charas weighing 11 -1 /2 kilograms was recovered.
3. Lt has been contended on his behalf that he has falsely been implicated in the Instant case, while no recovery has been effected from him; that allegedly he was only present at the dera of the aforesaid Saif Uiiah and there is no evidence that it in any way belonged to him; that it was night time, so the question of his identity is also not above doubt; that he has no concern at all with co- accused Muhammad Aslam from whom allegedly the charas of the above quantity has been recovered; that he is behind the bars and so no more required for further investigation; that provisions of Section 9(c) of the aforesaid Act are not applicable to his matter ln the circumstances of the case; that though, there were certain cases against him in the past, but he stands acquitted in all those cases; that confessional statement of co-accused Raees Ahmad before the police cannot be used against him, while, he has also sworn affidavit that he never made such statement before the police; and that his involvement in the case is result of enmity with Zafar Iqbal Dogar, Si/SHO of that Police Station, who illegally had arrested his relatives and consequently, he was constrained to i.e a writ petition against him and in the same a Bailiff was deputed to recover those persons.
4. Conversely, the learned counsel for the State has opposed the application on the grounds that it was he who in fact along with one Muhammad Aslam had sold charas to his co-accused Raees Ahmad, but luckily he had managed good his escape from the spot; and that as many as 26 cases almost of similar nature were registered against him which heavily reflect upon his character and conduct.
5. We have carefully considered the submissions advanced by both the sides with the help of record. The fact remains that neither any recovery was affected from the petitioner nor he was apprehended at the spot.
6. Admittedly, the dera wherein he was allegedly present at the time of raid, did not belong to him and rather to some other persons namely Saif Ullah. The question that if the confessional statement made by co-accused Raees Ahmad before the police can be used against him or that of his involvement in the matter needs serious consideration. While, prima facie, ho offence appears to have been made out against him in the above circumstances of the case. So to us, there appear no reasonable grounds to believe that he has. Committed non-bailable offence and rather there are grounds for further inquiry into his guilt.
7. Ln our view, when this may be the position, then the embargo contained in Section 51 of the Act will not be attracted.
As regards, the plea regarding other cases against him, the leamed counsel for the State has not been able to show that he was convicted in any of those cases and rather the plea from his side that he was acquitted in all those cases has not been controverted by him (State counsel).
8. In this view of the matter, we find that the case for his enlargement on bail has been made out.
We, therefore, accept the petition and admit him bail in the sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- (rupees one lac) with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the leamed Trial Court.