GULZAR AHMAD Versus STATE

ORDER

The petitioner Abid Shah has moved this petition for bail after arrest under section 497/498, Cr.P.C. in a case registered against him under section 302/148/149 at Police Station Satarah District Sialkot vide F.I.R. No. 31/88, dated 17‑2‑1988. The allegation against the petitioner is that he was armed with a Dang with which he infected injuries on the person of Muhammad Yaqoob deceased on 17‑2‑1988. The principal argument raised and argued by the learned counsel is that despite direction of this Court, the trial Court has not been able to conclude the trial of the petitioner within the specified period.

2. The learned State counsel has brought to my notice that the learned Sessions Judge has been elevated to the Bench and as such the trial could not be concluded within the time fired by this Court. Additionally he states that the petitioner is named in the F.I.R. and he was armed with a Dang with which he inflicted injuries on the person of the deceased Muhammad Yaqoob. He argues that there is sufficient evidence to connect the petitioner with the commission the crime.

3. I have heard the learned counsel and have perused the record. There is no force in the contention of the learned counsel that the trial could not be, concluded despite the direction issued by this Court and as such the petitioner is entitled to be released on bail. It is conceded by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the learned Sessions Judge has been elevated as Judge of this Court and as such the said order could not be complied with. No other point was argued by the learned counsel. At this stage, I do not find any ample justification to allow bail to the petitioner because he has been attributed a specific role in the commission of the crime in the F.I.R. There is, therefore, no substance in the petition, which is dismissed.

SA./A‑521/L Bail refused.