SHARAFAT ALI and anothers vs The STATE and another
This matter concerns three consolidated petitions for post-arrest bail filed by Sharafat Ali, Muhammad Khan, Jaffar Ali Zafar, and a juvenile, Muhammad Tayyab Raza, in connection with FIR No. 383/2013 registered at Police Station Chak Baidi. The petitioners sought bail primarily on the statutory ground of delay in the conclusion of their trial. The core legal question was whether the petitioners were entitled to bail due to the prolonged incarceration without the trial reaching a conclusion, despite being indicted on July 1, 2015. The Court observed that the petitioners had been in custody for a significant period—some since January 2014 and the juvenile since March 2015—and that no prosecution witnesses had been examined, with the delay not being attributable to the petitioners. Holding that the statutory right to a speedy trial had been violated, the Court granted post-arrest bail. The key principle laid down is that where the prosecution fails to conclude the trial within a reasonable time and the delay is not caused by the accused, the accused is entitled to the concession of bail under the statutory provisions regarding delay.
- Does a significant delay in the conclusion of a trial, not attributable to the accused, entitle the accused to post-arrest bail?
- Is a juvenile offender entitled to bail when the trial has not concluded within a reasonable timeframe?
- Section 324, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 364-A, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 337-A(i), Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 337-F(i), Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 337-L(2), Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 336, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 148, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 149, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
ORDER
' SHAHID HAMEED DAR, J.---The petitioners, Sharafat Ali, Muhammad Khan (Crl.Misc.No,3352- B/2016), Jaffar Ali Zafar (Crl. Misc. No, 9220-B/2016) and Muhammad Tayyab Raza (Crl. Misc. No, 11028-B/2016), a juvenile, seek post-arrest bail on the statutory ground of delay in conclusion of their trial in case-FIR No, 383/2013, dated 5.9.2013, under sections 324, 364-A, 337-A(i), 337-F(i), 337- L(2), 336, 148, 149 P.P.C., registered at police station Chak Baidi (Pakpattan Sharif), on the complaint of Muhammad Haroon. All three above-noted applications are compositely decided hereby.
2. Precisely, the story of FIR as narrated by the complainant is that his maternal nephew Atta Ullah, a student of seventh crass and paternal nephew Muhammad Waqas, a student of eighth class in Government Elementary School of the village were forcibly dragged out from the school by the accused-petitioners and their co-accused, all armed with different weapons, at about 7.30 a.m. On 5.9.2013, where they rendered them naked and committed violence on them; on hearing the noise of the children, he, his brothers Muhammad Ishaq, Zahoor Ahmad and his two sons, Abdul Jabbar and Muhammad Altaf reached the spot; the accused raised Lalkaras, when they saw them; Muhammad Khan accused fired into the chest of his son Abdul Jabbar by means of .12-bore repeater-gun and Sharafat Ali accused fired at left calf and buttock of his brother Zahoor Ahmad, due to which they both fell on the ground badly wounded; Muhammad Yaqoob co-accused inflicted a sota blow on the head of Muhammad Altaf, whereas Muhammad Nasir co-accused caused an injury on the head of Muhammad Ishaq and one, at a finger of left hand of Atta Ullah; the motive behind the occurrence pertained to a previous quarrel between his paternal nephew Muhammad Waqas and Muhammad Tayyab (petitioner), that took place a day earlier.
' A cross-case was set up by the accused on 5.9.2013 for offences under sections 324, 148, 149, P.P.C, which was recommended for cancellation by the Investigating Officer vide case-diary dated 11.1.2014. The complainant's name thereof was Khadim Hussain.
3. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and perusing the record, it is observed that Muhammad Tayyab Raza (petitioner), who was declared a juvenile by the learned trial court on 28.7.2016, was arrested on 8.3.2015 and Sharafat Ali, Muhammad Khan and Jaffar Ali Zafar (petitioners) on 30.1.2014. Their trial has not concluded as yet, nor did there exist any symptoms thereof, anywhere near. The petitioners were indicted long before, on 1.7.2015, but no prosecution witness has been recorded so far, for a variety of reasons, not necessarily attributable to the petitioners. Learned counsel for the complainant