' MAULVI ANWARUL HAQ,J---The petitioner seeks post-arrest bail in case F.I.R. No,240, registered with Police Station Qutabpur, Multan on 11-9-2004 for an offence under Articles 3/4 of the Prohibition (Enforcement of Hadd) Order, 1979 read with section 7 of ATA, 1997.
2. The petitioner was arrested on 11-9-2004. I may note here that a learned Judge Anti-Terrorism Court-I, Multan vide order dated 1-4-2005 gave a finding that he had no jurisdiction and no provision of Anti-Terrorism Act, 1997 is attracted and he sent the case to the learned Sessions Judge, Multan. His bail application was rejected by a learned Additional Sessions Judge, Multan on 25-5-2005. Thereafter, he filed Cr.M. No,3383-B-05 which was disposed of as withdrawn on 13-12- 2005 with a direction to the learned trial Court to conclude the trial within three months. This was not done. Again Cr.M. No,1982-B-06 was filed which was also disposed of as withdrawn on 10-7- 2006 with a direction to the trial Court to conclude the proceedings within two months. This has not been done.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that there is no evidence of commission of any offence under Article 3 of the Prohibition (Enforcement of Hadd) Order, 1979 and his client has already undergone the maximum punishment of imprisonment prescribed under Article 4 of the said Order. Learned counsel for the State has opposed the bail application.
4. This is rather an unfortunate case. It is not understandable as to how the police added section 7, ATA, 1997 in the F.I.R. There is no evidence of sale of the liquor and the learned State counsel states with reference to the police records that according to the report of the Chemical Examiner the liquor was not found to be adulterated. It is a matter of record that the petitioner has suffered more than two years of incarceration. Needless to State that the trial is still at the same stage. The Cr. M.
Is accordingly allowed and the petitioner is admitted to bail subject to his furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs,30,000 (Rupees thirty thousand only) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Teamed trial Court.