Farid Ullah vs State S — 2026 MLD 154 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURT

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

Farid Ullah VS State S. 497(1), third proviso---Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss. 419 & 420---Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Control of Narcotic Substances Act (XXXI of 2019 ), S.9(D)---Cheating by personation, cheating and dishonestly inducing the delivery of property, possession of narcotic substances---Bail, grant of---Statutory ground of delay in conclusion of trial---Allegation against the petitioner was that 14400 grams charas was recovered from a vehicle driven by accused-petitioner---Record/order sheets of the Trial Court would transpire that on majority of the dates, the witnesses were not present, on some dates, the Presiding Officer was on leave while on other dates, the local Bar was on strike---Though, there were two adjournments on part of the defence i.e. 13.2.2023 and 01.2.2024 when the witnesses were present but counsel for accused was not available, however, keeping in view adjournments on majority of the dates on part of the prosecution, the delay could not be solely attributed to accused---Delay on part of the defence pertaining to those two days came to be about 24/25 days whereas the accused petitioner was behind the bars for the last 02 years and 03 months and his trial had not been concluded so far---If the proceedings before the Trial Court continued in such leisurely manner, it might take another year to conclude the trial---Third proviso to S.497(1),Cr.P.C., said that if an accused was charged of an offence punishable with death who had been detained for such offence for a continuous period exceeding two years and whose trial for such offence had not been concluded he had a statutory right to be released on bail---If the delay occurred because of the two adjournments on part of the defence was excluded, still the case of accused petitioner was ripe for consideration under para (b) to 3rd proviso to S.497 (1),Cr.P.C., as the statutory period of two years was to be reckoned from the date of arrest of an accused person and not from the date when the charge was framed---Nothing had been brought on record that the delay in conclusion of trial had been occasioned solely on part of the accused petitioner or any other person acting on his behalf or that he was an offender covered by the 4th proviso to S.497 (1),Cr.P.C., thus he was entitled to be released on bail---Bail petition was allowed, in circumstances.

Farid Ullah vs State S — 2026 MLD 154 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURT

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2026 MLD