1981 P Cr (PLP)

Ghulam Qadir Jatoi for A. -G. for the State. Date of hearing : 30th January, 1980. The learned counsel for the applicants does not press the application for Hussain as his detention is for the period which is less than two years, He contends that applicants Ghulam alias Ghulamoo and Manoo alias Mumtaz have been arrested on 7th March, 1976 and their trial for the first time started after more than two years i.e. 26th July, 1978 and the applicants have continuously remained in custody for a period of three years and nine months. He refers to amendment of section 497, Cr. P. C. by Ordinance No. LXXI of 1979, whereby a proviso is added to subsec. tion (3 ), which reads as under:- "In the said Code, in section 497, in subsection (1) in the Second Proviso for the full-stop at the end a colon shall be substituted and thereafter the following Proviso shall be added, namely: "Provided further that the Court shall, except where it is of opinion that the delay in the trial of the accused has been occasioned by an act or omission of the accused or any other person acting on his behalf, direct that any person shall be released on bail. (a) who, being accused of any offence not punishable with death, has been detained for such offence for a continuous period exceeding one year and whose trial for such offence has not concluded ; or (b) who, being accused of an offence punishable with death, has been detained for such offence for a continuous period exceeding two years and whose trial for such offence has not concluded." The only ground on which the learned counsel for the applicants argues is that of a delay and according to him the only witness remaining to be examined in the case has not attended the Court since last more than six months and it was on account of this that the trial has not yet concluded. The witness being a Police Officer, it is not known as to how long he would take to attend the Court.

2. The learned counsel for the State does not deny this factual posi tion and concedes to grant of bail in view of the new amendment of sec tion 497, Cr. P. C. He further points out that absence of S. H. O. has mainly occasioned, delaying the trial and he has been responsible for non- conclusion of it.

3. After having heard the learned counsel for the applicants and State, it has become clear that there is no allegation against the accused that they or any one else acting on their behalf has occasioned delay, in the trial of the applicants who have continuously remained in custody for more than two years and are entitled to bail in view of amendment of section 497, Cr. P. C. Therefore I grant bail to both of the applicants and they shall be released on their furnishing solvent sureties in the sum of Rs. 20,000 and P. R. bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of the 1stAdditional Sessions Judge, Sukkur. The application of accused Hussain stands dismissed as it has not been pressed by the counsel. Bail allowed.