Woman secures bail in drug peddling case

KARACHI: The Sindh High Court (SHC) has granted bail to a woman arrested in a narcotics case after observing that the alleged offence did not fall within the prohibitory clause of Section 497 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC) and that questions raised by the defence required further examination at trial.

A two-member regular bench comprising Justice Muhammad Faisal Kamal Alam and Justice Amjad Ali Sahito heard the post-arrest bail plea of Naseem Bibi. She was arrested in May near the Karachi Toll Plaza along with her husband, Hayat Khan, and another person. According to the prosecution, police recovered 102 grams of methamphetamine, commonly known as ice, from her possession. The prosecution also alleged that Hayat Khan and his family were involved in selling narcotics to students of Baqai University.

After a trial court turned down her bail request, the applicant approached the SHC through counsel. Her lawyer argued that she had been falsely implicated and maintained that the alleged recovery did not attract the prohibitory clause under Section 497 CrPC. The defence also submitted that the prosecution had neither associated any private witness with the alleged recovery nor produced video footage of the recovery, which counsel said was required under the law.

An assistant prosecutor general for Sindh opposed the application and argued that the woman had been arrested at the spot and the drugs were recovered from her possession. However, after hearing both sides and reviewing the record, the bench noted in its order that the defence contention regarding the prosecution’s failure to produce video recording of the alleged recovery prima facie had substance and required due consideration.

The court observed that Section 17, dealing with video recording, of the Sindh Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 2024 was enacted to ensure transparency, fairness and accountability in raids, searches, seizures and arrests conducted under the law. It further noted that the record showed an alleged recovery of 102 grams of ice from the applicant and that she had remained in judicial custody for more than two months, while no meaningful progress had been made in the trial.

The bench also said that the issue of the sentence, if any, would be determined only after the trial, subject to the prosecution proving its case. It noted that the alleged offence carries a minimum punishment of six months and a maximum of one year, and therefore does not come within the prohibitory clause of Section 497 CrPC. The order added that bail is a rule and refusal an exception, and that the assistant prosecutor general had failed to identify any exceptional circumstance justifying continued detention.

The SHC further observed that all prosecution witnesses were police officials and that there appeared to be no likelihood of the applicant tampering with the evidence. It also noted that the prosecution had not placed any material on record to show that the applicant was a previous convict or involved in any other case of a similar nature. Holding that her case fell within the scope of further inquiry, the court granted bail against a solvent surety of Rs100,000.