1997 P Cr (PLP)

Abdul Aziz Khan Niazi for Petitioners. Sh. Anwar-ul-Haq for the State. Petitioner Sarnawaz and Muhammad Anwar sought bail after arrest in case F.I.R. No.32 of 1995, dated 19-1-1995 under section 380/392/458, P.P.C. of Police Station City, Khanewal registered on the statement of Fida Hussain complainant against some unknown persons for the commission of theft of golden ornaments, currency notes and prize bonds during the night between 18/19-1-1995 from his house situated in Block No.14, Khanewal. During the investigation petitioners were found involved in the occurrence.

2. Learned petitioners counsel argued that no detailed description of the features of the culprits is given in the F.I.R.; and no specific role has been attributed to any one in the F.I.R. that the petitioners were involved falsely on account of party faction; that fictitious recovery of prize bonds is shown by the Investigation Officer with mala fide; that numbers of prize bonds allegedly recovered from the custody of the petitioners did not tally with the numbers of prize bonds mentioned in the F.I.R.; that the petitioners were shown to the complainant and other witnesses prior to the holding of identification parade and that the petitioners were arrested on 7-5-1995 and trial of the case has not yet commenced.

3. Learned State Counsel argued that sufficient material exists on the record which connects the petitioner with the commission of offence and that the complainant and the witnesses have no enmity whatsoever with the petitioners which would prompt them to falsely involve the petitioners in the commission of offence.

4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the record.

5. Petitioners earlier moved Criminal Miscellaneous No.1471/B of 1995 for the grant of bail after arrest which was withdrawn by the petitioners in view of the direction of this Court to the trial Judge to conclude the case within two months of the receipt of the order, dated 22-10-1995. I have perused the orders passed by the learned Magistrate Section 30, Khanewal on 22-10-1995, 5-11-1995, 16-11-1995, 30-11-1995, 14-12-1995, 20-12-1995 and 2-1-1996. All these orders show that no proceedings whatsoever were conducted by the trial Court as the learned Civil Judge/Magistrate Section 30 was promoted and his successor did not take charge during this period. This would show that the direction of the Court for completion of the trial within a period of two months was not complied without any fault of the petitioners. The petitioners are under custody since 7-5-1995 and according to the learned counsel not even a single witness has been recorded, so far. In my considered view, the proceedings before the lower Court tantamounts to the abuse of process of Court. It is yet to be seen whether from the evidence collected during the investigation offence under section 411, P.P.C. is made out or the petitioners are liable under section 458/380/392, P.P.C. The petitioners are in the judicial lock-up and no more required for further investigation. They are stated to be previous non convicts. For what has been stated above, the petitioners have made out a case for the grant of bail after arrest. Resultantly the petitioners are admitted to bail after arrest provided they furnish bail bonds in the sum of Rs.40,000 each with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of A.C./Duty Magistrate, Khanewal. N.H.Q:/S-101/L Bail granted.