RIASAT AL Versus THE STATE

ORDER

1. ANWARUL HAO, J .-After hearing the learned counsel for the parties we have decided to convert this petition into an appeal and to dispose it of accordingly.

2. The two petitioners are facing prosecution under section 302, P. P. C. read with sections 34 and 1C9 thereof for allegedly causing the death of one Altaf Hussain whose body has not yet been found. In the first information report made by the father of the deceased on the 3rd of March 1975, it was alleged that the deceased had disappeared nine days before the date of the report. As motive, it was alleged that the petitioner Riasat had grievance against the deceased who had objected to the petitioner eloping with the widow sister of the deceased, It was also alleged that Riasat wanted to grab the property of the orphaned children of the said widow, and he found that the deceased was an obstacle in his way.

3. The prosecution has relied on circumstantial evidence, including the evidence of the deceased being last seen alive in the company of the two petitioners and the approver Ashiq, for connecting the petitioners with the crime. It is not necessary for us to recount these circumstances for the disposal of the present appeal, as we propose to allow bail to the petitioners solely on the ground of the inordinate delay that is likely to occur in the disposal of the case against them.

4. As already stated the first information report was registered on the 3rd of Match 1975. The petitioners were arrested a few days later. and since then they have been in custody. Owing to the abolition of the commitment proceedings the case is now pending in the Court of the learned Sessions Judge, Kasur. According to the information available with the learned counsel appearing for the State, this case stands at No. 144 of the list of the trial Court, and its turn in due course is likely to come in about two or 2J A years from today as the Sessions Judge is able to dispose of, on an average, four to five Sessions cases per month. The learned counsel is not in a position to make any statement at the Bar whether there is any proposal under the contemplation of the Government to appoint Additional Sessions Judge at Kasur in the near future. Accordingly, the estimate of time given by him for the disposal of the case is based on the assumption that the entire work load will continue to fall on one Sessions Judge alone.

5. From the information given by the learned counsel for the State it becomes clear that even though the petitioners have already been in custody in connection with this case for one year and nine months, they Era likely to remain so far another 2 or 21 years before their trial can be expected to commence, thus making a period of nearly four years in custody without trial. Although this Court has generally taken the view that delay per se is not a good ground for allowing bail but we have no doubt at all in our mind that a delay of four years in the likely commencement of the trial is indeed an B in conscionable and inordinate delay, such as would entitle the petitioners to be enlarged on bail. In our jurisprudence an accused person is presumed to be innocent unless found guilty by a competent Court, and accordingly to hold a person in custody for nearly four years without any prospect of even commencing the trial strongly militates against this concept so as to amount to an abuse of the process of the Court.

6. We would, therefore, accept this appeal and direct that the petitioners be enlarged on bail in the sum of Rs. 20,000 with one surety in the like amount in each case to the satisfaction of the trial Court.

7. Although the delay, likely to be caused in the disposal of this case, is particularly shocking, yet cases involving considerable delays are frequently coming before us since the abolition of the commitment proceedings. It is, therefore, necessary that the Provincial Government should take immediate and effective steps for augmenting the strength of trial Judges in all the Sessions Divisions of the Punjab. We would accordingly, direct that a copy o this order shall be transmitted to the Chief' Secretary to the Government of the Punjab for urgent necessary action in this behalf.

8. S. A. H. ?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? Bail allowed.