Muhammad Rauf vs State S — 2025 MLD 132 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Fields are extracted from the reported citation and judgment text. Where a detail is not stated in the record, it is not shown.

Muhammad Rauf VS State S. 497(1), third proviso---Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S. 489-F---Dishonestly issuing a cheque---Bail, grant of---Statutory ground of delay in conclusion of trial---In the present case, the petitioner (accused) was arrested in the case on 30.07.2022 and sent to jail on the same day where he was confined till now i.e. for more than a period of one year and 10 months and trial of the case had not concluded---Case had been registered against the petitioner under S.489-F, P.P.C and same was not punishable with death---Statutory period for grant of bail on the ground of delay in conclusion of trial of the case was continuous detention exceeding one year as per 3rd proviso to S.497(1), Cr.P.C.---It was not disputed by the prosecutor and the complainant that petitioner was behind the bars for a continuous period exceeding one year and ten months---Perusal of the record revealed that challan report under S.173, Cr.P.C., was received in the Court on 19.11.2022, charge was framed against the accused on 20.01.2023 and prosecution witnesses were summoned for 03.02.2023, however, prosecution witnesses did not appear before the Court till 17.10.2023 inspite of summoning them through warrants of their arrest---Meaning thereby that after arrest of the petitioner on 30.07.2022, continuous period of detention of the petitioner exceeding one year lapsed without conclusion of the trial and said delay was not caused due to any act or omission of the petitioner or any other person acting on his behalf---Prosecutor and the complainant could not refer to any material to show that petitioner was a previously convicted offender for an offence punishable with death or imprisonment for life or to opine at this stage that petitioner was a hardened, desperate or dangerous criminal or was accused of an act of terrorism punishable with death or imprisonment for life---Moreover, after completion of statutory period, if any adjournment had been obtained by the accused, it did not disentitle him for grant of bail on ground of delay in conclusion of trial rather he was entitled to be released on bail as a matter of right---Therefore, a right to be released on post-arrest bail had accrued to the petitioner due to delay in conclusion of trial of the case under 3rd proviso to S.497 (1), Cr.P.C.---If case for grant of post-arrest bail on the ground of delay in conclusion of trial has been made out then bail is granted as a "right" under 3rd proviso to S.497(1), Cr.P.C.---Petition for grant of post-arrest bail on the statutory ground of delay in conclusion of trial of the case was allowed, in circumstances.

Muhammad Rauf vs State S — 2025 MLD 132 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2025 MLD