1985 P Cr (PLP)

Shaikh Rehman Bux for Applicants. Abdul Ghafoor Mangi, Asstt. A.‑G. for the State. This is an application for bail on the sole ground of delay in trial. Their bail application was dismissed by this Court (Cr. Bail Application 93/84) on 16‑4‑1984 and directions were given as under:‑ "It is however directed that the trial of the applicant be concluded by 31st May, 1984. It is further observed that in case trial is not concluded by 31st May, 1984 it would be open to the applicant to file a fresh application in this court directly. This order has been noted by the Assistant Advocate‑General." Mr. Shaikh Rehman Bux learned counsel has contended that in spite of direction given by this court the trial has not concluded and application has been repeated. He has further argued that applicants Nos. 1, 2 and 3 were arrested on 19th, 10th and 15th December, 1980 respectively and the trial has not yet concluded. Mr. Abdul Ghafoor Mangi, Asstt. Advocate‑General has no objection to the grant of bail. In this case no doubt the applicants also sought adjournments for some time and these factors were considered by my brother Justice Nasir Aslam Zahid who was sitting in Hyderabad Circuit. He directed the trial Court to complete the case by 31st May, 1984 but in spite of directions case has not completed and applicants have remained in jail as under‑trial prisoners for more than 3J years. Further I consider good ground for bail and they are entitled to benefit of section 497, proviso 3, Cr.P.C. Accordingly I admit them to bail on furnishing two solvent sureties in the sum of Rs.50,000 each and P R bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Sessions Judge, Hyderabad. Before parting with this order I, however, would like to invite attention of the trial Court to a case of Mohammad Yakoob alias Kooba v. The State P L D 1984 S C 1 where their Lordships have observed as under:‑ "Before parting with the case, however, we would like to observe that we are disturbed to notice the number of adjournments given by the learned Additional Sessions Judge in a murder trial. Murder trials are required by the High Court Rules and Orders to be completed with utmost expedition. But the Courts hands are tied and it cannot proceed even if one of the accused is absent. If the learned trial Judge in this case feels that the accused are absenting themselves deliberately in order to delay the completion of the trial, he may consider cancelling their bail. If, on the other hand, the jail authorities fail to produce the accused on any of the date of hearing the learned trial Judge, may consider taking action for contempt against them." Under these circumstances it is duty of the trial Court that they should see that trial is concluded as early as possible otherwise these are the clear cases to abuse of process of law. M. Y. H.????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? Bail granted.