SARWAR SHAKIR Versus THE STATE

ORDER

1. Accused in offences relating to trafficking of heroin and counterfeit currency has applied for bail to this Court. Bail was denied to him in the lower Courts. On 9‑2‑1991, local police found him in possession of 1,000 grams of heroin and 97 counterfeit currency notes of Rs.1,000 denomination each. He was apprehended at the spot and put behind the bars. Upon finalization of police investigation, challan for trial of the accused was submitted to the Court. Unfortunately, despite considerable passage of time, trial has not yet commenced. It is because of the transfer of a Judicial Magistrate without a substitute for him. Challan is lying unattended in Court except for adjournment in routine for awaiting arrival of a substitute.

2. Accused claimed bail on statutory ground. It is further claimed that on number of dates of hearing, the accused was not produced in Court for a further judicial remand. In support of bail petition, some case‑law was also relied upon.

3. There is no doubt that substantial delay has already taken place in the commencement of trial. Much of it took place because of non‑availability of the trial Magistrate. There is not yet a substitute provided for the Magistrate transferred from the Court. In this view, further delay unless some arrangement for an early trial is made, is inevitable. Offences of trafficking n. heroin and counterfeit currency were of serious nature. Punishment prescribed for each of them was life imprisonment. It fell within the prohibitory clause of section 497, Cr.P.C. Expiry of statutory period entitles the accused to concession for bail pending his trial except a dangerous and hardened criminal. Trafficking in large quantity of heroin as also dealing in counterfeit currency were no doubt a dangerous activity. Heroin is a menace to the society and counterfeit currency a threat to economy of the country. A person dealing in them could safely be termed as dangerous. Therefore, having regard to the nature of offences and punishments prescribed for them, despite expiry of statutory period, I do not feel disposed to allow bail to the accused on this score. Nonetheless, I shall not be approving of inordinate delay in the trial of the accused. An early and expeditious trial must be the right and desire of every accused. He must not he disappointed on that score. In order to reach an early decision, learned Sessions Judge Rawalpindi is called upon to make an appropriate order for transfer of the trial of the accused from the present Court to any other Court of competent jurisdiction in his district and issue a direction for its early finalization also. Copy of the order alongwith the records received from the trial Court may be sent to learned Sessions Judge, Rawalpindi for making of an appropriate order for trial of the case.

4. NHO/M‑348/L. Bail refused.