2001 P Cr (PLP)

Talaat Farooq Sheikh for Petitioners. Badar Munir Malik for the State. Record perused.

2. Earlier, an application moved by the petitioners (Criminal Miscellaneous No.80/B of 1997) was dismissed by Mr. Justice Khalid Paul Khawaja (as he then was), after hearing the parties at length and looking into all the aspects of the case on 12-2-1997. They moved a fresh application (Criminal Miscellaneous No. 1051/B of 1997) which was again dismissed by him on 25-3-1997. In both these orders, it was observed by him that the petitioners were prima facie guilty of the offence under section 324, P.P.C. which fell within the prohibitory clause of section 497, Cr.P.C. He, therefore, did not find the case fit for enlarging the petitioners of bail.

3. Subsequently, however, a co-accused of the petitioners, Shaukat Ali was allowed bail in Criminal Miscellaneous No.6076/B of 1996 by Mr. Justice Abdul Hafeez Cheema, on 16-6-1997. It has now been claimed by the learned counsel for the petitioners that in view of the rule of consistency, the petitioners to whom the same role is attributed as to Shaukat are also entitled to the concession of bail. I, however, did not feel impressed by this argument because case of Shaukat was on, a different footing from that of the petitioners because of Investigating Officer had come to the conclusion that Shaukat was not present at the spot and it was in this view of the matter that the learned Judge had concluded that his involvement in the case was doubtful.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioners has then urged that a perusal of record shows that the petitioners have been behind the bars for the last about 15 months i.e. since they were apprehended on 5-8-1996 and the delay in the conclusion of their trial is not attributable to them, as can be conveniently gathered from the certified copies of the order-sheets, placed before the Court and that as such they are entitled to bail on the statutory ground in view of the provisions of third proviso (a) to subsection (1) of section 497, Cr.P.C. The learned State Counsel has not been able to show otherwise. The petitioners have definitely been behind the bars for a continuous period exceeding one year and their trial for such offence has not been concluded. The record is silent to show that they are hardened, desperate or dangerous criminal or are involved in terrorism nor has such claim been made by the State.

5. In these circumstances, the petitioners are enlarged on bail subject to their furnishing bail bond in the sum of Rs.1,00,000 (Rs. one lac only) each with two sureties in the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Sessions Judge, Faisalabad. N.H.Q./L-14/L Bail granted.