Muhammad Farooq vs The State and another
This criminal petition was filed under Section 497 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898, seeking post-arrest bail for the petitioner, who was accused in a case registered under Sections 302, 109, and 34 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860. The petitioner's primary contention for bail was the delay in the conclusion of his trial. The core legal question before the Court was whether the petitioner had satisfied the statutory requirements for bail based on the delay in trial proceedings. Upon review, the Court examined the second proviso to Section 497(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898, which stipulates that a male accused charged with an offense punishable by death may only seek bail on the ground of trial delay after a continuous detention period exceeding two years. The Court observed that the petitioner had been in custody since September 2014, which did not meet the mandatory two-year threshold. Consequently, the Court held that the application was premature and dismissed the petition, establishing that the statutory right to bail based on trial delay is strictly contingent upon the completion of the specified period of continuous detention.
- Does the statutory right to bail based on trial delay for a male accused charged with a capital offense require a minimum period of continuous detention?
- Is a trial delay claim for bail maintainable if the accused has not completed the two-year period of continuous detention prescribed by the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898?
- Section 497, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
- Section 497(1), Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
- Section 302, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 109, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 34, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
Through this petition under section 497 Cr.P.C. The petitioner has sought bail after arrest on the ground of delay in conclusion of trial in case FIR No.173/14 dated 03.06.2014 under sections 302, 109, 34 PPC, Police Station More Eminabad, District Gujranwala.
2. I have heard the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties at considerable length and have perused the file of this petition. It has been noticed by this Court that first bail after arrest of the petitioner i.e. Criminal Miscellaneous No.199-B of 2015 was withdrawn after addressing arguments vide order dated 03.03.2015, whereby the learned trial Court was directed to conclude petitioner's trial within six months. Thereafter the petitioner again moved before this Court seeking post arrest bail through Criminal Miscellaneous No.7028-B of 2015, which too was withdrawn vide order dated 16.06.2015. Now the only ground agitated by learned counsel for the petitioner before this Court is the delay in conclusion of trial of the petitioner's case. In this regard, I would like to take guidance from the provision of law dealing with the matter in hands i.e. Part (b) of second proviso to section 497(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898, which is reproduced as below:- "who, being accused of an offence punishable with death, has been detained for such offence for a continuous period exceeding two years and in case of a woman exceeding one year and whose trial for such offence has not been concluded." Perusal of the above said provision of law has made it clear that in cases like the one in hand, a male accused may seek his bail after arrest on the ground of delay in trial only after his continuous detention for a period of two years. Admittedly, the petitioner was arrested in the instant case on 17.09.2014, therefore, at this premature stage, the petitioner has not earned the right of statutory delay in conclusion of trial and bail cannot be granted only on the ground that the trial of the petitioner has not been concluded as yet.
3. For what has been discussed above, this petition has got no force and the same is hereby dismissed.