2012 PLP 541 (YLR)

MAZHAR IQBAL SIDHU, J.

Muhammad Naveed Bashir and Muhammad Shoaib Gujjar have sought post-arrest bail in a case registered against them through F.I.R. No. 371 dated 14-5-2008 under sections 302/324/148/149/34/109, P.P.C. at Police Station Misri Shah, Lahore on the complaint of Muhammad Arshad for the alleged murder of Muhammad Shafique.

2. Release in the instant case from jail through bail on the ground of statutory period of delay in non-conclusion of the trial within stipulated period has been sought.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that meritoriously on 30-10-2009 bail application of the petitioners was dismissed by this Court. Now it is being solicited on the ground of delay in trial; the petitioners were quelled on 19-7-2008, since then continuously they are behind the bars for a period more than three years, one month and that the perusal of order sheet throws up that delay in disposal of the case has not been caused by the petitioners or anybody else acting on their behalf rather most of the dates were obtained by the prosecution in order to adduce its evidence. The learned counsel has further submitted that no doubt it is a murder case but exceptional clause for gainsaying the relief sought is not available in this case as the petitioners are neither previous convicts, desperate, and nor ever remained involved in any act of terrorism, therefore, they are entitled for the concession of bail.

4. The learned DPP assisted by the learned counsel for the complainant has opposed the petition by submitting that major portion of the prosecution evidence has been recorded and only one I.O. and two formal witnesses are yet to be examined and if a direction for a limited period for disposal of the case is issued to the learned trial court then it can be concluded within a couple of weeks. Further submits that facts of the case demonstrate desperation on the part of the petitioners and they prior to their being arrested were declared proclaimed offenders and there is a strong apprehension of their absconsion after the release on bail, therefore, in the circumstances of the case, they may not be granted bail.

5. Heard. Record perused.

6. Without paying a visit to the merits of the case because the same shall be considered by the learned trial court while disposing of the case finally suffice it to say that the petitioners were apprehended on 19-7-2008. Since that they are continuously behind the bars. More than three years have been passed but the trial has indubitably not been concluded. The petitioners have not been involved in any act of terrorism nor they are hardened criminals nor desperates. No remarkable circumstance has been found against them to gainsay the relief sought for.

7. For what has been stated above, the instant application is allowed and both the petitioners are granted bail subject to furnishing their bail bonds in the sum of Rs.3,00,000 (Rupees three lac only) each with one surety each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial court.

8. Before parting with this order, it is clarified that if the petitioners would cause any hindrance during the trial proceedings then the learned trial court shall forfeit their bail bonds and to immure them in prison. N.H.Q./M-354/L Bail granted.