SHAHBAZ vs THE STATE
This petition concerns a request for post-arrest bail by the petitioner, Shahbaz alias Shaboo, who sought relief on the grounds of statutory delay in the commencement of his trial. The core legal question before the Court was whether the petitioner was entitled to bail based on the principle of consistency and the significant delay in the trial proceedings, given that a co-accused with an identical role had previously been granted bail on similar grounds. The Court observed that the petitioner had been in custody for eighteen months without the trial having commenced, despite the challan having been submitted. Without delving into the merits of the case, the Court held that the prolonged incarceration without the commencement of trial constituted sufficient grounds for the grant of bail. The Court accepted the petition, allowing bail subject to the petitioner furnishing bail bonds in the amount of Rs. 50,000 with one surety to the satisfaction of the trial Court, thereby reinforcing the principle that undue delay in trial proceedings serves as a valid ground for bail.
- Does an eighteen-month delay in the commencement of a trial constitute sufficient grounds for the grant of post-arrest bail?
- Is a petitioner entitled to bail on the principle of consistency if a co-accused with an identical role has already been granted bail?
- Section 497, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
ORDER
' Facts of the case are not required to be given in this petition because the same have already been given in Criminal Miscellaneous No,7719/B of 2000 titled as Sarfraz and others. v. The State and Criminal Miscellaneous No,835/B of 2002 titled as Sarfraz v The State. In Criminal Miscellaneous No,7719/B of 2000 except Nasreen Bibi the bail petition of other accused was dismissed then Sarfraz again applied for bail and he was allowed bail on the ground of delay.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner in support of this petition submits that as far as Shahbaz alias Shaboo petitioner is concerned, his role is identical to that of Sarfraz, that he was arrested in this case on 18-9-2000, 18 months have passed but trial of the petitioner's case has not commenced so far.
3. S.H.O. Present in Court submits that challan was submitted on 5-1-2001 but admits, that petitioner was arrested on 18-9-2000.
4. Without going into the merits of the case, as 18 months have passed, trial has not concluded even has not started as stated at bar by learned counsel for the petitioner, therefore, this petition is accepted. Petitioner is allowed bail subject to furnishing bail bonds it) the tune of Rs,50,000 (Rupees fifty thousand) with one surety in the like-amount to the satisfaction of trial Court. revisions by the competent authorities. Therefore, it is advisable to consult the official sources or legal professionals for the most up-to-date and accurate information.