ALLAH NAWAZ vs THE STATE
The petitioner sought post-arrest bail in case F.I.R. No. 3 of 2004 registered under Section 302/34 of the Pakistan Penal Code at Police Station Esa Khel, District Mianwali. The initial case under Section 337-A(ii)/34 PPC was converted to Section 302 PPC after the injured complainant expired months later following an operation. The Lahore High Court observed that the trial was already underway with several prosecution witnesses examined and material eyewitnesses yet to be tested. The Court held that granting bail at an advanced stage of trial was inappropriate. Consequently, the bail application was dismissed, while the trial court was directed to conclude the proceedings within two months, granting the petitioner liberty to file a fresh application if the trial remained unconcluded.
- Whether post-arrest bail should be granted when the trial has commenced and key eyewitnesses remain to be examined?
- Can the High Court direct the trial court to conclude proceedings within a specified timeframe while dismissing a bail application?
- Section 302, Pakistan Penal Code
- Section 34, Pakistan Penal Code
- Section 337-A(ii), Pakistan Penal Code
ORDER
' The petitioner seeks bail after arrest in case, F.I.R. No,3 of 2004 registered on 14-1-2004 in Police Station, Esa Khel, District Mianwali under section 302/34, P.P.C.
2. The F.I.R. Was lodged by Atta Muhammad complainant regarding an occurrence which had taken place on 14-1-2004 at 12-30 p.m. The F.I.R. Was initially registered under section 337-A(ii)/34, P.P.C. However, subsequently, Atta Muhammad deceased expired as a result of the operation conducted in Meo Hospital, Lahore on 18-5-2004 and it was then that section 302, P.P.C. Was added.
3. At the time of arguments, it was pointed out that the trial is underway and statements of as many as 4 P.Ws. Have already been recorded. Under the circumstances, I do not think that it will be appropriate to grant bail to the petitioner at this stage when the trial has commenced and when the statements of alleged eye-witnesses are yet to be recorded. Hence it would be appropriate to issue a direction to the learned trial Court to expedite the proceedings of the trial, so as to A conclude the same expeditiously. Hence a direction is issued to the learned trial Court to expedite the proceedings of trial, so as to conclude the same within the period of two months. In case the trial is not concluded by the learned trial Court within a period of twu months, the petitioner shall have the right to file a fresh bail application before this Court. However, so far as the present application is concerned, I do not think that it will be appropriate to grant bail to the petitioner at this stage. The bail application is accordingly dismissed.