Lawyers Directory Listing
Chat with us free on WhatsApp — tell us your city and legal matter and our team connects you with the right lawyer. No form, no fee.
Criminal Bail Application No. 25 of 1985, decided on 14th May, 1985.
‑‑‑S. 497‑‑Customs Act (IV of 1969), S. 156(1)(8)‑‑Bail, grant of‑ Petitioners in jail for over 8 months without trial and further progress not in sight‑‑Petitioners only crew‑members and labourers and as such mere carrier of alleged contraband goods‑‑Owner of such goods already granted bail‑‑Petitioner allowed bail, in circumstances.
Ghazi Shah v. The State 1983 S C M R 727 ref.
Muhammad Ali Shaikh for Applicants.
Abdul Sattar Pinger for the State.
Five applicants, who have applied for bail, are stated to be crew‑members of the launch and are facing trial for offence under section 156(1) (8) of the Customs Act read with section 2(s) of the Customs Act, 1969.
It is the case of the prosecution that on 5‑10‑1984 a launch was spotted by the Customs and chased and there was exchange of firing and subsequently the launch was overtaken and the present five applicants were apprehended at the spot while others made good their escape. From the launch about 31,930 wrist watches, 270 V.C.P., 3 V.C.P., 3 Video Cameras and 4 Thans of art silk were recovered which were concealed in the Engine Room.
Bail plea for the present five applicants is urged on the grounds that they were arrested on 5‑10‑1984 and so far have remained in Jail for eight months and nine days till today and so far no beginning has been made in the conduct of trial.
Mr. Abdul Sattar Pinger stated that prosecution proposes to examine five witnesses and so far even charge has not been framed. In the circumstances it cannot; be said as to when the trial will end.
It is submitted by the learned counsel for the applicants that all applicants are crew‑members and are labourers and at the most they can be called carriers but not beneficiaries and they are entitled to bail for the reason that owner of the goods namely Adam son of Yaqoob has been granted bail before arrest by the trial Court on 15‑12‑1984. Not only this but show‑cause notice has been issued to him under section 171 of the Customs Act for adjudication proceedings in which in paragraph 2 it is clearly stated that investigation and evidence collected has revealed that the seized contraband goods belong to Adam son of Yaqoob. It is further submitted by Mr. Muhammad Ali Shaikh that the bail has been granted by the Supreme Court in the case of Ghazi Shah v. The State 1983 S C M R 727 in which the facts were almost similar and there was allegation of smuggling gold from Dubai and the Supreme Court was pleased to grant bail to the carriers for the reason that High Court had granted bail to Haji Afzal who was the main accused and the others worked for him as carriers.
In the circumstances and for the facts and reasons stated above, I admit applicants to bail in the sum of Rs. 50,000 with one surety and P.R. each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court.
S. G. D.
Bail allowed.
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
🔍 Find a Lawyer