MUHAMMAD RIAZ and another vs The STATE

ORDER

ZAFAR AHMED RAJPUT, J.----Through instant Criminal Bail Application, the applicants/accused Muhammad Riaz son of Muhammad Shafi and Abdul Latif son of Muhammad Hanif seek post- arrest bail in Crime No, 184/2014, registered at P.S. Saudabad, under section 395, P.P.C. Earlier to it, application for grant of bail filed by the applicants/ accused before the learned Vth Additional Session Judge, Karachi (East) in Sessions Case No, 2253/2014 was dismissed, vide order dated 17.10.2015.

2. Briefly stated facts of the prosecution case are that on 22.01.2014 complainant Khalid Saeed, while going on his motorcycle to Malir Kala Board, reached Khursheed Begum Road, near Malir Park at about 0015 hours, where six persons on two motorcycles showing pistols snatched from him Rs, 6,500/- and two Nokia Mobile phones. Meanwhile, police mobile reached there and on his hue and cry police chased the accused persons and succeeded to arrest two accused persons, along with motorcycle, while four accused persons made their escape good. From accused Muhammad Riaz one .30 bore pistol without number, with magazine containing five live rounds and one Nokia mobile, which was snatched from complainant and cash Rs,400/-, were recovered; whereas, from accused Abdul Latif one .30 bore pistol, with magazine containing 06 live rounds, one Nokia mobile phone and cash of Rs,600/- were recovered.

3. Learned counsel for the applicants/accused submits that the accused are innocent and have been falsely implicated in this case by the police with ulterior motives and mala fide intention. He further submits that the accused are behind the bars since 22.09.2014; therefore, they are entitled for concession of bail on the sole ground of statutory delay.

4. On the other hand, learned A.P.G. Has opposed this application on the ground that though the accused are behind the bars for last more than one year but looking to the fact that R & Ps has been received to the trial Court on 04.12.2014 from the Court of Sessions Judge, Karachi (East) and the charge was framed on 01.06.2014, if the period is calculated from the date of charge it would become only six months; as such, statutory ground is not available to accused and this application is liable to be dismissed. He has; however, admitted that there is no previous criminal record of the accused and the delay in trial has not occasioned due to their act and till date not a single witness has been examined by the trial Court.

5. I have given due consideration to the contentions of learned counsel for the applicants/accused, learned APG and also perused material available on record.

6. Section 497, Cr.P.C. Gives the accused an independent right for grant of bail on the ground of statutory delay in conclusion of trial subject to certain conditions i.e, (i) that the delay in conclusion of trial had occasioned on account of an act or omission on the part of the accused or any person acting on his behalf; (ii) that the accused is a previously convicted offender for an offence punishable with death or imprisonment for life; (iii) that in the opinion of the Court, the accused is a hardened, desperate or dangerous criminal; and (iv) that the accused is involved in an act of terrorism punishable with death or imprisonment for life. If these conditions are not applicable to the case of an accused, he is entitled to the bail as a matter of right and since such right is not left to the discretion of the Court, it cannot be denied under the discretionary power of the Court.

7. The right of an accused to an expeditious and fair trial has been enshrined in the Constitution.

The object of criminal law is to make accused face trial and not to punish him as under trial prisoner. The intention of law is that a criminal case must be disposed of without unnecessary delay. It will not be difficult to comprehend that inordinate delay in imparting justice is likely to cause erosion of public confidence in the judicial system on one hand, and on the other hand, it is bound to create a sense of helplessness and despair and feelings of frustration and anguish apart from adding to their woes and miseries. The accused cannot be deprived of the liberty without due process of law; if any delay occurs in trial due to the act of the court or prosecution, then the liberty of accused cannot be curtailed for the fault on the part of the court and prosecution.

8. In the instant case, it an admitted position that the accused are behind the bar for last about 15 months. The challan was submitted against them by the prosecution on 24.10.2014. Charge was to be framed within a reasonable period by the trial Court, but it took more than 7 months. The delay in conclusion of trial is not attributed to accused and not a single ground, as discussed above, is available with prosecution to decline the bail to accused on the statutory ground.

9. Accordingly, I allow this application. The applicant/accused are admitted to bail subject to their furnishing solvent surety in the sum of Rs, 1,00,000=00 (Rs, One Lac Only) each, and P.R. Bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court.

10. Needless to mention here that if applicants in any manner try to misuse the concession of bail, it would be open for the trial Court to cancel their bail after issuing them the requisite notice. The trial Court is also directed to expedite the Walk and conclude it preferably within a period of six months hereof.