' Through this application, the petitioners, meer Ghulam and Mandos have prayed for post arrest bail on statutory ground in case FIR No, 03 dated 06.01.2014, registered under Sections 379, 511, 462B, 462-F, PPC at Police Station Rojhan District Rajanpur.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioners argued that the petitioners are behind the bars for the period of more than two years and their trial has not been concluded; that the delay in trial has occurred due to non-production of evidence in spite of issuance of non-bailable warrants of the PWs; that the delay if any occurred on behalf of the co-accused of the petitioners cannot be attributed to the petitioners; that in nine other cases of similar nature the petitioner Meer Ghulam has been acquitted and he has been falsely implicated in this case. He placed reliance upon "Muhammad Afzal Butt @ Aphi vs. The State and others" (2015 SCM R 1696).
3. On the other side, learned APG assisted by the learned counsel for the complainant opposed this petition and contended that both the petitioners are habitual offenders for crime against state and society; that petitioner Meer Ghulam is involved in 14 criminal cases of similar nature, whereas, petitioner Mandos is involved in 6 other similar criminal cases registered under Sections 462-B, 462-F, PPC etc. And in this way they are desperate & hardened criminals; that on so many dates the prosecution produced its witnesses but their evidence could not be recorded due to non- availability of defence counsel.
4. Arguments heard. Record perused.
5. Perusal of record reveals that this case was registered on 6.1.2014 against the petitioners and others with the allegations of stealing the oil from the main transmission line of Pak Arab Refinery Limited (PARCO). The petitioners were arrested in this case on 17.1.2014 and after dismissal of their bail application by the learned lower Court, Mehar Ghulam filed Cr1. Misc. No, 1493-B of 2014 and Mandoos petitioner filed Crl. Misc. No, 2727-B of 2014 for their post arrest bail before this Court which both applications were dismissed on merits vide order dated 5.6.2014. Then the petitioners filed Criminal Petitions No, 917-L to 919-L of 2014 before the Hon'ble Supreme Court of Pakistan for their post arrest bail which were subsequently withdrawn on 7.11.2014. Thereafter the petitioners filed Crl.
Misc. No, 6136-B of 2015 before this Court for their post arrest bail on statutory ground and after arguing the case to some length learned counsel for the petitioners opted not to press that petition subject to direction to the learned trial Court for disposal of case within shortest period. Resultantly that petition was dismissed by this Court being not pressed vide order dated 5.11.2015, however, the learned trial Court was directed to decide the case on merits in accordance with law as early as possible, preferably within period of two months and it was observed by this Court that in case the trial will not be concluded within such period the petitioners will have the right to repeat the bail petition. Now, the petitioners have filed this application on statutory ground.
6. The report from the learned trial Court about progress of the case and causes of delay was called. The learned trial Court has submitted detailed report vide Letter No, 09 dated 20.2.2016 narrating therein that due to non-production of prosecution witnesses and absence of Accused case could not be completed and the learned trial Judge has requested for three months period for conclusion of trial.
7. There is no denial of the fact that the petitioner Meer Ghulam was involved in 14 other similar criminal cases and petitioner Mandos is accused in six other criminal cases of similar nature. It has been contended by the learned counsel for the petitioners that petitioner Meer Ghulam has been acquitted in nine criminal cases but the fact remains that he is still accused in five other criminal cases registered under Sections 462-B and 462-F, PPC etc, whereas, the other petitioner Mandos is also, accused in six other criminal cases of similar nature. Learned counsel for the petitioners has placed on record the certified copy of the order sheet of the learned trial Court which reveals that on 21.11.2015, PWs Abid Ali Agha and Mushtaq Ahmad, S.I, were in attendance but their evidence could not be recorded due to strike of bar. On 22.12.2015 one witness Mushtaq Ahmad, S.I. Was in attendance and on 13.1.2016 two witnesses Altaf Hussain and Abid Ali Agha were in attendance but their evidence could not be recorded due to non-production of one co-accused Mithoo ##TE# from other jail and due to non-appearance of other accused. On 22.1.2016, PWs Abid Ali Agha and Altaf Hussain Security Officer were, in attendance but the learned counsel for the accused was not available and due to that reason their evidence could not be recorded. On 9.2.2016, again PWs Altaf Hussain and Abid Ali Agha were in attendance but learne4 Presiding Officer was on leave.
8. In view of the above discussion and observations this Court is of the view that the petitioners have not succeeded to make out their case for grant of bail on statutory ground at this stage.
Resultantly, I dismiss this petition. However, the learned trial Court is directed to conclude the trial and decide the case as early as possible before 30.4.2016 positively by giving short adjournments.
' Copy of order be sent to learned trial Court through concerned learned Sessions Judge of the District by fax immediately.