1981 PLP 727 (SCMR)

Ch. Asghar Ali Bhatti, Advocate instructed by Iqbal Ahmed Qureshi, Advocate- on-Record for Petitioner. Asad Hussain Zaidi, Advocate with Ijaz Ali Sheikh, Advocate-on- Record for the State. Date of hearing : 5th December, 1977. ANWARUL HAQ, C. J.-The petitioners are aggrieved by the refusal of the Lahore High Court, by its order dated the 24th of June, 1977, to allow them bail during the pendency of an appeal filed by them in the High Court against their conviction and sentence of life imprisonment under section 302/34, P. P. C. by the learned Sessions Judge Bahawal nagar. The conviction was recorded against the petitioners by the trial Court on 12th March, 1974 and they had sought bail before the High Court mainly on the ground that under the newly-inserted subsection (1-A) to section 426 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, they were entitled to it as their appeal had not been heard within two years. This submission was not accepted by a learned Judge of the High Court by his order dated the 18th of March, 1976. He was doubtful whether the new subsection had in fact come into force or not. Even otherwise, he thought that it was not necessary to allow bail in all cases on the ground of this technical provision. In seeking leave to appeal, it is submitted by Mr. Mohammad Asghar Bhatti that the new subsection had been brought into force by a notifica tion issued by the Government on the 26th of December, 1975 and therefore, the learned Judge who passed the initial order on the 18th of March 1976 refusing bail, and also the learned Judge who dismissed the second application of the petitioners by his order dated the 24th of June, 1977, were both in error in not giving effect to this provision of law. A perusal of the subsection relied upon by the learned counsel for the petitioners shows that bail is to be allowed in such cases if the appeal has not been disposed of within two years, but the same could be refused for the reasons to be recorded by the High Court. We find that in the order made by the High Court on the 18th of March, 1976 some observations as to the merit of the case were made while refusing bail. We also take note of the fact that the appeal filed by the petitioners is already on the cause list of the Bahawalpur Circuit of the High Court. It had originally come up before the Court in October but then was adjourned to November and now stands adjourned to next visit of the High Court Judges to Bahawalpur during this month. It would, therefore, apnea; that there is possibility of the appeal being disposed of during the next Circuit of the High Court at Bahawalpur. In the circumstances, no compelling reason is made out for our interference in the matter. The petition is accordingly dismissed. Petition dismissed