2009 PLP 320 (MLD)

RAJA SAEED AKRAM KHAN, J.

This single order will dispose of this petition along with connected bail petition re: Waheed uz Zaman v. State (Criminal Miscellaneous No. 305-B/2008), as both the matters are outcome of same F.I.R. No.240, dated 14-10-2006 registered under sections 413, 411, 471, 201, 420, 468 P.P.C. at Police Station, Tarnol (Islamabad).

2. Petitioners Zia Aftab alias Taboo and Waheed uz Zaman, seek their post arrest bail in above noted case, wherein allegation against them is that they are involved in the business of sale and purchase of cut and weld vehicle by preparing forged and fictitious documents.

3. Both learned counsel for the petitioners submit that in spite of direction of this Court, the trial has not been concluded and even charge has yet not been framed in this case; that the petitioners are behind the bars for the last more than one year; that most of the sections attributed in this case i.e. 420, 471, 201 P.P.C. are bailable, whereas, punishment provided for section 468, P.P.C. is 7 years and that section 413 P.P.C. is not applicable in this case.

4. On the other hand, learned Federal Counsel has vehemently opposed these bail petitions, on the ground that challan has been submitted in the Court and trial is likely to commence, however, he conceded that after issuance of direction by this Court even charge has not been framed.

5. Arguments heard. Record perused.

6. Admittedly, after issuance of direction by this Court for expeditious conclusion of trial within four months, even charge has not been framed in this case and the direction period has lapsed. The copy of order sheet, which has been produced by learned counsel for the petitioners, shows that on 11-7-2007 date was fixed for farming of charge, but later on no tangible progress has been made in this case. Petitioners are languishing in jail for the last more than one year. Most of the sections attributed in this case are bailable, whereas, applicability of section 413, P.P.C. is to be determined at the time of trial after recording of evidence. Nobody can be kept behind bars for indefinite period, without trial, which amounts to punishment without trial. I am afraid that learned trial Court has not seriously taken the direction issued by this Court. Inspite of specific direction for conclusion of trial within 4 months, even charge has yet not been frame and direction period has lapsed. No plausible excuse has been advanced by leaned trial Court in this regard.

7. For what has been discussed above, I am inclined to accept these petitions. Both the petitioners are admitted to bail, subject to their furnishing bail bonds valuing Rs.1,00,000 each with one surety each in the like amount to the satisfaction of learned trial Court. H.B.T./Z-1/Isl????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? Bail granted.