A district and sessions court in Karachi on Monday rejected the bail applications of individuals accused of facilitating the main suspect in the Anmol alias Pinky drug case, stating that available evidence provides sufficient grounds for their involvement at the preliminary stage.
Court Observations
Announcing the reserved written judgment, the court held that the accused were, prima facie, key facilitators of the main suspect Pinky. It further observed that investigative findings, including bank records and digital evidence, establish their connection with the alleged narcotics network.
The court noted that under the Sindh Control of Narcotic Substances Act, assistance in drug manufacturing or financial facilitation constitutes a punishable offence. It added that material collected during investigation suggests the applicants had acted as aides to the main accused and co-suspect Humaira.
The court further stated that a preliminary challan had already been submitted in the case, and at this stage, the grant of bail could not be justified in view of the available evidence.
Prosecution Claims
According to prosecution claims, co-accused Sohail-ur-Rehman and Zeeshan-ur-Rehman were involved in laundering proceeds of narcotics, with funds being routed through different accounts after Pinky's bank accounts were frozen. It was alleged that transactions were carried out through accused Sameer, and that Sohail allegedly used accounts linked to Sameer and Zeeshan for property-related payments and procurement of raw materials.
The prosecution further claimed that Pinky's younger brother Nasir had been employed with Sameer since 2016, strengthening the alleged link between the parties. It was also stated that forensic examination of mobile phones recovered from the main accused revealed the involvement of the co-accused, while suspicious financial transactions were detected in their bank accounts. Investigators claimed that funds were transferred from these accounts to the main accused and other alleged associates.
Defence Arguments
During the hearing, defence counsel Rehman Ghani Khattak Advocate argued that Sohail and Zeeshan had no connection with co-accused Sameer, terming the allegations as "old and unsubstantiated." He maintained that the applicants were not named in the FIR and were implicated later during the course of investigation.
However, police argued that the case was registered at Garden police station and subsequent evidence collected during investigation established their role in the alleged network.
