Aziz Ullah Vs The State

Judgment Sheet rlY rHE rmsHs,)v,4R,,Erslr., QQ"tlBI. p.ssIrAwAR, 4r"HCrAL SRHARTMpTYT.

Cr. M. B.A No. 642 of 2024

Aziz Ullah

VS

The State.

Date of hearing 22.03.2024

Petitioner(s) by: Mr. Shabbir Hussain Gigyani, advocate. State by: Mr. Aqil Hussain, AAG.

JUDGMENT

*rf**,f

IJAZ ANWAR.J Through the instant bail application, accused petitioner Aziz Ullah son of Habib Khan seeks his release on bail in case FIR No. 04 dated 21.01.2024 registered under section 5 Exp: Substances Act/ Section 7 ATA at Police Station CTD, Mohmand.

4 2. In the instant case, accused petitioner alongwith co-accused is charged for recovery of huge quantrty of detonators, gun powder, calcium aluminum and safety fuse from the Datsun No.J-

v

1592 being driven by co-accused Iqbal whereas accused petitioner was seated in the front seat.

3.Arguments of learned counsel for the parties heard and record perused.

4.Record transpires that accused petitioner has been apprehended red handed and recovery of huge quantity of detonators, gunpowder, calcium aluminum and safety fuse has been effected from the Datsun being boarded by him. The BDU report available on record shows that the explosive I material was inspected and made safe on the spot.

The co-accused namely Iqbal has admitted in his statement u/s 16l Cr.P.C that he used to carry explosive substance 213 times a week for delivery to the other accused (s) and that on the day of occurrence, he alongwith the present accused petitioner who is working as conductor with him loaded the said explosive substance in the Datsun.

J

The accused petitioner in his statement u/s 161 Cr.P.C also admitted loading of the explosive substance in the Datsun from a shop situated at Gandap. The presence and recovery of huge explosive material has been admitted by accused petitioner who could not show any reason qua its possession for lawful object. Frequent transportation of explosive substance i.e. 213 times a week apparently speaks volume regarding its use for endangering lives of the public and sabotagng the peace of the land. The acts of terrorism is a menace which is threatening the country's law and order situation, violating human rights of the citizens, damaging basic infrastructure and is eroding the country's social structure and economic development and the person (s) involved in facilitating the availability of destructive material deserve no leniency. The offence with

which accused petitioner is charged is not only serious but heinous in nature, thus his bail plea cannot be accepted.

5.During arguments, learned counsel for the petitioner argued the petition in a manner which amounts to touching deep merits of the case, however, it is bail petition and at such stage, deeper appreciation of evidence is not warranted and only tentative assessment of the record is to be made. Reference can be made to PLD 1994 SC-65 wherein the august Supreme Court of Pakistan held that:

"At the stage of bail and before recording of evidence in the trial Court, only tentative assessment is to be made for the purpose of deciding bail application and it is not permissible to go into the details of the t evidence one way or the

I

other because that might prejudice that case of one party or the other."

\l

6 Thus on tentative assessment,

sufficient material is available on record, prima facie connecting the accused petitioner with the commission of offence punishment whereof falls within the prohibitory clause of section 497 Cr}.C disentitling him to the concession of bail.

Resultantly, this bail application stands dismissed.

I

JUDGE

Announced onl Dated. 22.03.2024

*Jlmir'