Mehmood Khan vs State Ss — 2026 PCrLJ 815 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH

Fields are extracted from the reported citation and judgment text. Where a detail is not stated in the record, it is not shown.

Mehmood Khan VS State Ss. 497(2), 265-K & 561-a---Control of Narcotic Substances act (XXV of 1997), Ss. 9(c), 14 & 15---Possession of narcotic substances, prohibition on aiding, abetment or association in narcotic offences---acquittal at bail stage---allegations against the accused persons were that 499-kilograms charas was recovered from the vehicle of the accused persons---During the course of investigation, the Investigating Officer arrayed the applicant as absconding accused person in the report under S.173, Cr.P.C---Held: Record was stark in its absence of any direct evidence connecting the applicant to the alleged crime---No witness had testified to seeing the applicant at or near the scene of the alleged offence---No recovery had been made from his person or property---No communication or correspondence had been intercepted linking him to the conspiracy---Prosecution case, stripped of legal technicalities, rested on nothing more than the bare assertion of the Investigating Officer---Prosecution had failed to establish even a chain of circumstantial evidence---There was no evidence of the applicant's presence in the vicinity at the relevant time---There was no evidence of his association with the convicted accused---There was no evidence of any financial transactions or communications that might suggest involvement in the alleged conspiracy---There were no circumstances whatsoever, and the chain was not merely incomplete, it was non-existent---Prosecution's reliance on the applicant's alleged abscondence was legally and factually untenable---There was no evidence that the applicant was ever served with any notice or that he was aware of the investigation---Subsequent surrender of applicant and appearance before the Court belied any suggestion of deliberate evasion---Inclusion of the applicant's name in the challan appeared to be based entirely on hearsay evidence, which was generally inadmissible in criminal proceedings---Investigating Officer had not explained the source of information that led to the applicant being implicated---No independent witness had corroborated the allegation---Entire case against the applicant appeared to be constructed on the foundation of rumor and speculation---Where continuation of proceedings would amount to harassment in the absence of material evidence, the Court must exercise its jurisdiction to secure the ends of justice---Similarly, in numerous other precedents, the Courts have emphasized that the mere mentioning of an accused's name in a challan, without supporting evidence, could not justify subjecting him to trial---Moreover, prolonged proceedings without reasonable prospect of conviction undermined public confidence in the justice system and brought the law into disrepute---applicant's right to liberty, dignity, and fair treatment were not merely abstract constitutional concepts but living rights that demanded judicial protection---Process of criminal trial, even if ultimately resulting in acquittal, inflicted irreparable damage on an individual's reputation, financial resources, and psychological well-being---Where there was no reasonable prospect that such trial would serve the cause of justice, the Court had both the power and the duty to intervene to protect individual rights---There existed no probability whatsoever of conviction of the present applicant on the basis of the material available---Prosecution case against applicant was not merely weak, it was non-existent---In exercise of the inherent jurisdiction of this Court under S.561-a, Cr.P.C., and guided by the principles of natural justice, constitutional guarantees of fair trial, and the imperative to prevent abuse of judicial process, present bail application was converted into a Criminal Miscellaneous application---In terms of S.265-K, Cr.P.C., and in furtherance of the ends of justice, applicant was acquitted of the charge under Ss.9(c), 14 & 15 of Control of Narcotic Substances act, 1997.

Mehmood Khan vs State Ss — 2026 PCrLJ 815 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2026 PCRLJ