FAQIR MUHAMMAD vs The STATE and another

' IQBAL HAMEEDUR RAHMAN, J.---Through the instant petition the petitioner seeks post-arrest bail in case F.I.R. No. 37/2013 dated 1-8-2013 for offence under Section 39-A of Electricity Act, 1910 read with section 5(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947 registered at P.S. FIA, ACC, Lahore. The instant case has been registered against the petitioner and other co-accused including WAPDA employees after a raid had been conducted by the Assistant Director, FIA, with the allegation that the petitioner had been committing theft of electricity by using direct supply of electricity from the main line of WAPDA. It has further been alleged that through the said line the petitioner was also providing electricity to 70/80 other inhabitants of the locality thereby causing huge loss to Government exchequer. The petitioner earlier moved two bail applications before the learned Special Judge (Central), Lahore, which were declined. Thereafter, he approached the learned Lahore High Court, Lahore seeking his bail but the same has also been declined vide impugned order, hence this petition.

2. Mr. Hammad Akbar Wallana, learned counsel for the petitioner, contended that the petitioner is an old person of 70 years of age and primarily seeking his bail on medical grounds as he has developed ailment which, according to the report of the Medical Officer, is not curable in jail.

Learned counsel further urged that the petitioner has also made payment of the detection bill.

Besides, the petitioner is behind the bars since 1-8-2013.

3. On the other hand, Mr. Imran-ul-Haq, learned Deputy Attorney-General, accompanied by the Investigating Officer with record, submitted that the Challan has been submitted but the trial is being prolonged on account of non-availability of Special Judge (Central), Lahore. As soon as the said Court starts functioning on the appointment of learned Special Judge the trial is likely to conclude within one month. He further submitted that on account of current electricity crises in the country, strict measures are being adopted to curb theft of electricity in pursuance of which raids are being conducted and if the offenders are granted bail at such an early stage it would be detrimental to the steps being taken to curb this malice, therefore, in view of the same the bail should not be granted to the petitioner.

4. Heard. The petitioner is, prima facie, involved in the instant case under section 39-A of Electricity Act, 1910, which provides a sentence of three years' imprisonment and the petitioner is already A behind the bars for the last seven months. Although the Challan has been submitted, but on account of non-availability of Special Judge (Central), Lahore, the trial is not proceeding.

5. In the given circumstances and by taking into consideration the age and ailment of the petitioner, we are inclined to extend the benefit of bail to the petitioner. Resultantly, this petition is converted into appeal and allowed and the petitioner is granted bail subject to furnishing of bail B bond in the sum of Rs.100,000 with one surety to the satisfaction of the Deputy Registrar (Judicial) of this Court.

6. Before parting with the judgment, we cannot be oblivion of the fact that we have come across not only in the instant case but also in other cases where appointments of Presiding Officers of Special Courts are not being made and on account of this considerable delay in appointment of Presiding Officers the pending cases are being unnecessarily delayed due to laxity of concerned Executive Authority by not taking due steps towards their timely appointments. Therefore, we are constrained to pass a direction to the Competent Authority concerned to look into the matter and to take immediate steps for appointments of Presiding Officers of Special Courts immediately, with a further direction to submit a report in this behalf to the Registrar of this Court within a fortnight for our perusal in Chambers.