2022 PLP 676 (MLD)

MUHAMMAD IQBAL KALHORO, J.

Petitioner arraigned into two references i.e. References Nos.21/2019 and 04/2020, lies pleaded for post-arrest bail in both of them by means of petitions in hand on the ground of hardship by mainly referring to the term he has suffered in jail since 04.07.2019, the date of his arrest, without any tangible progress in the trials.

2. His counsel while relying upon an order dated 03.05.2021 passed in C.P. No.D-886/2021 and C.P. No.D-1307/2021, whereby, yet in two other references, petitioner was admitted to the same relief on identical ground, has feverishly contended that in Reference No.21/2019, only one witness out of 45, and in Reference No.04/2020, not a single witness out of 85, has been examined yet; and that end of the trial is not within sight and in such situation endless incarceration of the petitioner is against tenets of natural justice and fair trial.

3. Both learned Special Prosecutor, NAB and IO have, however. opposed relief to the petitioner.

4. The fact that prosecution has not made any material progress in any of the two references is but obvious from its utter inability to adduce evidence of main witnesses thus for. But, more than that, it has not made a single effort or clamour to counter or offset protraction of the trials by seeking their urgent hearing. Rather, it has remained hibernated and content conveniently at a snail's pace instead of upping the ant, as required, to engender urgency in the matters. Meanwhile, petitioner has completed more than 24 months in jail and there is nothing the prosecution can boast of qua its obligation to pursue the matters efficiently, and which, otherwise if done, could have been deemed sufficient to stave off consequences the delay has since brought about in favour of the petitioner. This configuration divesting the petitioner of his right to expeditious disposal of the trial has definitely induced a sense calling for a set-up, which of course is temporary in nature and subject to inference to be made at the end of trial regarding petitioner's guilt or otherwise, to mitigate the peril he is in for no fault of him.

5. Resultantly, these petitions are allowed and the petitioner is granted bail subject to furnishing two solvent sureties in the sum of Rs.500,000/- (Five lac only) in each case and P.R. bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Nazir of this Court. He is directed to cooperate in the trial and the trial court, if finds him causing any delay, may file a reference before this court for recalling the concession granted to him by means of this order.

6. The petitions stand disposed of in the above terms. The observations made hereinabove are tentative in nature and shall not prejudice case of either party at the trials. SA/M-15/Sindh Bail granted.