| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2026 SLG 1217 2026 SLD 1217 = 2025 PHC 8718 |
Peshawar High Court
Cr. Misc: BA No. 539-B/2025
Presented By: Mr. Justice Abdul Fayaz
Date of Hearing: 15.12.2025 For Petitioner: Mr. Muhammad Anwar Khan Maidad Khal, Advocate For
Respondents: Mr. Fahim Akram, Advocate (Via Video Link) For State: Mr. Muhammad Asghar Khan Ahmadzai, Addl. A.G
Cr. Misc: BA No. 539-B/2025
Presented By: Mr. Justice Abdul Fayaz
Date of Hearing: 15.12.2025 For Petitioner: Mr. Muhammad Anwar Khan Maidad Khal, Advocate For
Respondents: Mr. Fahim Akram, Advocate (Via Video Link) For State: Mr. Muhammad Asghar Khan Ahmadzai, Addl. A.G
Atiq-ur-Rehman
VERSUS
The State etc.
Law: Pakistan Penal Code, 1860
Section: 302, 34
Law: Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898
Section: 497(1)
Law: Constitution of Pakistan, 1973
Section: 10-A
SUMMARY
Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) β S.497(1), third proviso β Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss.302/34 β Constitution of Pakistan, Art.10-A β Bail, post-arrest β Statutory bail β Delay in conclusion of trial β Prolonged incarceration β Non-production of prosecution witnesses β Delay not attributable to accused β Right to fair and expeditious trial.
The petitioner, charged in a murder case, sought post-arrest bail on statutory grounds after his earlier bail applications on merits had been declined by the trial Court as well as the High Court. The petitioner had remained in custody since his arrest and, despite framing of charge, the prosecution examined only three witnesses over a long span of time. Material witnesses, including the complainant and the investigating officer, were yet to be examined. The order- sheets revealed repeated adjournments owing to non-appearance of prosecution witnesses, strikes by the local bar, official engagements of police officials, and proceedings relating to co-accused, none of which were attributable to any act or omission on the part of the petitioner.
Held: Where an accused has suffered prolonged incarceration and the prosecution fails to conclude its evidence within a reasonable time for reasons not attributable to the accused, continued detention becomes punitive rather than preventive. Such a situation squarely attracts the third proviso to S.497(1), Cr.P.C, which is reinforced by the constitutional guarantee of fair trial and due process under Article 10-A of the Constitution. The seriousness of the charge, by itself, cannot defeat the statutory right to bail in the face of inordinate and unexplained delay in the trial. Consequently, the petitioner was entitled to the concession of post-arrest bail on statutory grounds.
Result: Petition allowed; post-arrest bail granted on statutory ground.
Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) β S.497(1), third proviso β Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss.302/34 β Constitution of Pakistan, Art.10-A β Bail, post-arrest β Statutory bail β Delay in conclusion of trial β Prolonged incarceration β Non-production of prosecution witnesses β Delay not attributable to accused β Right to fair and expeditious trial.
The petitioner, charged in a murder case, sought post-arrest bail on statutory grounds after his earlier bail applications on merits had been declined by the trial Court as well as the High Court. The petitioner had remained in custody since his arrest and, despite framing of charge, the prosecution examined only three witnesses over a long span of time. Material witnesses, including the complainant and the investigating officer, were yet to be examined. The order- sheets revealed repeated adjournments owing to non-appearance of prosecution witnesses, strikes by the local bar, official engagements of police officials, and proceedings relating to co-accused, none of which were attributable to any act or omission on the part of the petitioner.
Held: Where an accused has suffered prolonged incarceration and the prosecution fails to conclude its evidence within a reasonable time for reasons not attributable to the accused, continued detention becomes punitive rather than preventive. Such a situation squarely attracts the third proviso to S.497(1), Cr.P.C, which is reinforced by the constitutional guarantee of fair trial and due process under Article 10-A of the Constitution. The seriousness of the charge, by itself, cannot defeat the statutory right to bail in the face of inordinate and unexplained delay in the trial. Consequently, the petitioner was entitled to the concession of post-arrest bail on statutory grounds.
Result: Petition allowed; post-arrest bail granted on statutory ground.
The petitioner Atiq-ur-Rehman sought post-arrest bail on statutory delay grounds in a murder case under FIR No. 171/2023 (Lakki Marwat).
- He was accused under Sections 302/34 PPC for alleged murder by strangulation and hanging.
- Earlier bail applications had already been rejected by both trial court and High Court.
- He had been in custody since 19.10.2023, and only 3 prosecution witnesses had been examined over a long period.
- The delay in trial was caused by non-appearance of witnesses, strike days, official duties (polio campaigns), and adjournments not attributable to the accused.
The Court held that:
- Prolonged detention without progress in trial violates Article 10-A (right to fair trial)
- Delay not caused by accused justifies bail under third proviso of Section 497 Cr.P.C
- Continued detention would amount to punitive incarceration
Γ°ΕΈββ° Result: Bail granted on statutory delay ground with surety conditions.