Supreme Court of Pakistan and Tanvir Ahmed Khan, J MUHAMMAD NAWAZ-

ORDER

1. ' TANVIR AHMED KHAN, J.---This petition is directed against the order, dated 3-7-2001 passed by a learned Single Judge of the Lahore High Court, Lahore, whereby the post-arrest application bearing Criminal Miscellaneous No,3274-B of 2001 filed by the petitioner was dismissed.

2. ' The facts briefly narrated for the disposal of this petition are that F.I.R. No,63 of 2000 was recorded at Police Station Rayya Khas, District Narowal, on 5-5-2000 at the instance one Ghulam Nabi under sections 302/ 324/148/149, P.P.C. Stating that the petitioner alongwith seven others armed with lethal weapons opened murderous assault upon the complainant party by raising Lalkaras and resorted to indiscriminate firing. It was also alleged that contaminated watercourse was also diverted into the fields of the complainant by the petitioners' side. In this occurrence two persons lost their lives.

3. ' Learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that no specific role whatsoever has been attributed to the petitioner and there was no occasion to resort to indiscriminate firing as alleged in the F.I.R. After the diversion of the watercourse as alleged.

4. ' Learned Law Officer as well as the learned counsel appearing for the complainant have controverted the stance taken by the petitioner. They have stated that during investigation the petitioner has been found fully implicated in the offence and the challan has already been submitted in the Court. The charge, according to the learned Law Officer, was framed on 4-10-2001 and testimony of one witness was recorded on 27-11-2001. He has further stated that the petitioner's side is not cooperating with the conclusion of the trial as they sought adjournments on five occasions on the dates when all the witnesses of the case were present in the Court. He has also stated that the next date of hearing for recording of further evidence is fixed as 4-2-2002.

5. We have considered the contentions of the learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the documents available on record. Since the trial is likely to he concluded in the near future. As such, we are deliberately not attending to the merits of the case lest it may prejudice the case of either party. In this view of the matter. We are not inclined to grant the concession of post-arrest bail to the petitioner at this stage. The petition is, accordingly, dismissed and . The Learned trial Court is directed to expedite the matter and finalise the case as early as possible.