Minister of State for Narcotics Control, Shehryar Afridi, obviously had not done his homework when he claimed to have purported video evidence of PML-N leader Rana Sanaullah getting caught red-handed on July 1 by ANF personnel carrying 15 kg of heroine in his car. At a loss to defend that claim he made confusing statements at a presser on Wednesday after former Punjab law minister was granted bail by the Lahore High Court (LHC). Acknowledging that he had "talked about the footage in my first press conference along with the ANF DG " he said the evidence , including the footage had been provided to the court within 17 days of Rana's arrest. But then he also said had the video of the seizure (of narcotics) been recorded, it would have been termed a "planted movie." This can only be taken to mean the purported video never existed. In that case what was the footage about? As if that is not bad enough, Afridi made light of the bail order, saying "Rana Sanaullah's bail does not matter much; nowadays a season of bail is on." The comment suggests the court did not decide the case on the evidence presented before it and in accordance with the law, which may attract contempt of court proceedings.

The detailed verdict issued on Thursday makes it plain the prosecution had a reasonably weak case. Three important points stand out. First, the court has questioned why the Anti-Narcotics Force (ANF) never sought physical remand of the accused to investigate the drug trafficking allegation, surmising that the investigating agency "was not interested in unearthing the activities of the petitioner regarding smuggling of narcotics". Second and more important, are two pertinent and interlinked questions: Why formal documentary proceedings of the seizure of narcotics were not conducted at the time of arrest (that clearly suggests the video did not exist)? And why a sample of only 20 grams of the heroin, purportedly recovered from the accused, was sent for testing when the seized quantity - 15kg - was much higher? Third, the court found merit in the 'political victimization' argument made by the petitioner's counsel, observing that "in the context of the petitioner being a vocal political leader of [the main] opposition party, this aspect of the case could not be ignored as political victimization in our country is an open secret." Furthermore, the court noted that the petitioner's co-accused were granted post-arrest bail by the trial court in this case, which has not been challenged by the prosecution

Meanwhile, the opposition and other members of the federal government have been exchanging unpleasant remarks. This must stop. The accused has only been granted bail, not acquitted. The ANF seems to be taking a more professional approach to the case. Its legal team told reporters at a separate presser that the video was not a piece of entire evidence and that the case would be decided on the basis of the evidence, such as the seizure, chemical examination report, statements of investigating officers, and 15 eye witnesses. Both the government and the PML-N leaders would be well-advised to let the law take its own course.

Be that as it may, the Indian Congress leaderships, including Sonia Gandhi and P. Chidambaram, are on bail. India's prime minister Narendra Modi describes Congress party as belgari (hackery) party.