1997 PLP 1346 (MLD)

Chaudhry Muhammad Akbar Ali Cheema for Petitioner. Javed Iqbal for the State. Date of hearing: 24th July, 1995. On 20‑7‑1994 at 10‑00 p.m. within the area of Chak No.21/NP Saifullah‑petitioner is alleged to have made murderous assault upon Rahmat Ilahi complainant by surprising him and effecting the firing with .12 bore pistol which hit his left leg. Zahoor Ilahi and Niamat Ali saw the occurrence. Saifullah petitioner made good his escape alongwith the weapon. The cause of occurrence is the suspicion caused by Rehmat Ilahi complainant upon Saifullah‑petitioner regarding theft from his grocery shop. F. I. R. No. 125 dated 21‑7‑1994 was got registered by Rahmat Ilahi‑complainant under section 324, P.P.C. at P.S. Ahmadpur Lamina, District Rahimyar Khan. The bail application of Saifullah-petitioner has been rejected by the lower Courts who has filed this petition to try his luck to be admitted to bail.

2. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned State Counsel and gone through the record before me. Today learned counsel for the petitioner has canvassed about the bail of Saifullah petitioner on the statutory ground as according to him the petitioner was arrested on 22‑7‑1994 and that the period of his continuous detention has exceeded one year. The polite officer as well as the learned State Counsel have admitted that Saifullah petitioner was arrested on 22‑7‑1994. Today is 24‑7‑1995. It means that the period of continuous detention of Saifullah has exceeded one year. The petitioner is said to be a student and teen-ager. No other case of the instant nature stands registered against him. He is not hardened, desperate or dangerous criminal. As such he is held entitled to be admitted to bail in the light of clause (a) to proviso 3 to subsection (1) of section 497, Cr. P. C. according to which the accused of any offence not punishable with death whose trial for such offence has not concluded and the continuous period of his detention has exceeded one year is entitled to be admitted to bail. Learned State Counsel has conceded in the light of the aforesaid state of affairs who hag no contrary argument to address. Consequently I hold that the petitioner is at present entitled to be admitted to bail than to be retained in jail.

3. Finding it to be a fit case on the statutory ground, I accept this application and admit Saifullah‑petitioner to bail in the sum of Rs.20,000 (rupees twenty thousand) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Senior Civil Judge/Magistrate Section 30, Cr.P.C., Rahimyar Khan.

4. Copy Dasti subject to payment of usual charges, if desired. N.H.Q./S‑448/L Bail allowed.