ALLAH BUX vs THE STATE
This matter comes before the High Court upon a bail application filed by the accused, Allah Bux, who was charged with the murder of Mashooque Ali Chandio and causing injuries to his wife on 25-11-2000 under the prosecution's allegations. The core legal question concerns whether an accused person can be kept in prolonged incarceration without the commencement or conclusion of a trial due to the unavailability of prosecution witnesses and the complainant. The court decided to grant post-arrest bail to the applicant, holding that an accused has a fundamental right to be tried within a reasonable time and cannot be subjected to punishment prior to conviction. The key principle laid down is that where an accused has remained in incarceration for a substantial period, such as seven years, without any fault on their part in causing delay, and the trial cannot proceed because witnesses are untraceable, further detention amounts to an abuse of the process of law, warranting release on bail.
- Whether an accused person can be kept in indefinite custody without trial due to the non-appearance of prosecution witnesses?
- Does prolonged incarceration without trial for a substantial period constitute sufficient ground for the grant of post-arrest bail?
- Is it the right of every accused to be put on trial within a reasonable time or to be released on bail?
ORDER
' ALI SAIN DINO METLO, J---Granted.
2. The date has already expired and the application has becume infructuous.
3. Heard Messrs Abdul Rahman Farooque Pirzada, Advocate for the applicant and Habib-ur- Rahman Shaikh, Assistant Advocate-General. The latter has no objection to the grant of bail as the applicant has remained in custody for about seven years without trial and without any fault on his part in causing the delay.
' According to the prosecution, on 25-11-2000, at 0015 hours, applicant Allah Bux Leghari, finding deceased Mashooque Ali Chandio, a resident of Larkana District, in compromising position with his wife Zuhran, killed him and wounded his wife with a wooden shaft, in his house situated in Mubarak Colony, Sukkur.
' In the month of February, 2001, Hafiz Nazir Hussain, brother of the deceased, filed complaint directly in the Court, alleging that four other persons, namely, Muhammad Piral, Deedar, Bajhi and Khair Muhammad were also with the applicant in killing the deceased and that too on a money transaction.
' The trial Court decided to proceed with the direct complaint first. However, the complainant failed to produce any witness. Inspite of making all possible efforts trial Court failed to secure attendance of the complainant and his witnesses. The non-bailable warrants repeatedly issued against them were returned unexecuted with the reports that the complainant and his witnesses, having shifted to some unknown place, were not traceable. The complainant's Advocate also gave the same statement.
' It is the right of every accused to be put to trial within a reasonable time or to be released on bail.
An accused cannot be kept in custody for indefinite period without trial. There is no concept of punishment before conviction in our system of criminal administration of justice. The applicant has remained in custody for about seven years, which is the substantial part of his life, without trial and he is not at fault in causing the delay. To keep him further in custody will amount to abuse of process of law particularly when the witnesses are not traceable. Accordingly, the applicant is directed to be released on bail on giving one surety in the sum of Rs.400,000 and personal bond in the like amount to the trial Court.