2005 PLP 273 (YLR)

S.497

Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss.302/337-H(ii)/148/149

Bail, grant of-- Accused was behind the bars for more than 2-1/2 years without trial and that too without any reasonable explanation or justification for said delay

In a period of about 8 months, for thirteen consecutive dates, accused was not at all produced-- Prosecution was duty bound to produce accused on each and every date, excepting for reason to be explained and disclosed for non-production, but no such reason appeared on the record

Trend had shown that case would take more than two more years

Accused was granted bail, accordingly. Jai Jai Vishno Mange Ram for Applicant. Muhammad Ismail Bhutto for the State. Applicant Sajan son of Azizullah, in Crime No.46 of 2002, Police Station, Ghouspur, for offence under sections 302, 337-H(ii), 148 and 149, P.P.C. claims bail on the ground of delay and hardship. Report was called from learned trial Court. It is reported that the applicant was arrested on 4-7-2002, he is confined in District Jail, Jacobabad, on and most of the dates he was not produced before the Court. Learned counsel at bar, stated that, charge has not been framed as yet. It is also pointed out that accused was also charged for an offence under section 13(d) Arms Ordinance, in associated crime, has since been acquitted being Crime No.49 of 2002, in S.C. No.140 of 2002 by Judicial Magistrate, Kandhkot. According to learned counsel, such acquittal judgment dated 16-7-2003, makes the case of prosecution doubtful. Learned counsel for State Muhammad Ismail Bhutto, confirms factual position. I have examined the case diaries produced by the applicant. From the diaries it appears that from 1st October, 2003 to 23rd June, 2004, for thirteen consecutive dates the accused persons were not produced at all. It is duty of prosecution to produce accused on each and every date excepting for reason to be explained and disclosed for non-production no such reason appears on the record. There is no justification to keep the accused persons without trial. Such being not in consonance with the settled principle that accused persons are entitled for expeditious trial. For more than 2-1/2 years accused is behind bars without trial, that too without any reasonable explanation for delay, looking at the progress in case which can hardly be said to be satisfactory. Trend shows that case will take more than two more years to take of. Under circumstances, applicant is extended benefit of bail, however, subject to furnishing two solvent surety in the sum of Rs.2,00,000 (two hundred thousand) each and P.R. bond in the like amount, to the satisfaction of the trial Court. The applicant shall continue to attend trial Court on each and every date. In case, concession of bail is misused or abused, learned trial Court will be at liberty to cancel the bail and forfeit the surety to the State. H.B.T./S-64/K Bail granted.