Through instant petition under Article 199 of The Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973, the petitioner namely Mian Muhammad Sharif seeks his release on post arrest bail in Accountability Reference No. 13 of 2017.
2. The prosecution in this case was set into motion with an inquiry on the allegation of misappropriation/embezzlement of amount of Rs. 68,22,310/- during process of acquisition of land for construction of road from Kahna to Halloki along both sides of Butcher Khana Distributary. The petitioner was arrested on 24th December, 2016 by the National Accountability Bureau (hereinafter referred as "NAB") when he was already in custody in Accountability Reference No.37 of 2016. He is now seeking his release on post-arrest bail pending trial.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner was arrested on 24th December, 2016 but since then he is languishing behind the bars without any fate of trial. It is contended that further incarceration of the petitioner would tantamount to punish him before his guilt is proved.
4. On the contrary, learned Special Prosecutor for "NAB" resisted the release of petitioner on bail.
5. We have heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Special Prosecutor at some length and also perused the record.
6. Before going into other merits of the case, we have noticed that the petitioner was arrested by the "NAB" in the instant case on 24th December, 2016. Despite elapse of more than two years, there is no progress in trial. Even charge As yet to be framed. The petitioner is old aged person. Progress of trial even after lapse of more than two years is insignificant. Keeping in view the number of witnesses and pace of trial, there can be no two opinions that conclusion of trial requires number of years. Offence under which petitioner is facing trial provides maximum punishment of 14 years'
R.I. The petitioner cannot be detained for an indefinite period and that too for the prima facie fault of prosecution. Reference in this regard may be made to "Muhammad Nadeem Anwar and another v National Accountability Bureau and others" (PLD 2008 SC 645), "Anwarul Hag Qureshi v. National Accountability Bureau and another" (2008 SCM R 1135), "Muhammad Jameel Rahi v. D.G. NAB and others" (2012 SCM R 552) and "Himesh Khan v. The National Accountability Bureau (NAB), Lahore and others" (2015 SCM R 1092).
In addition to it, we may advantageously like to reproduce here relevant portion from the operative part of unreported judgment of the honourable Supreme Court of Pakistan rendered in C. P. No.476 of 2018 titled "Tariq Mehmood v. National Accountability Bureau through its Chairman, Islamabad and others". The relevant extract from the same is reproduced below:- "The fact that the petitioner has been in jail for almost two years yet conclusion of his trial in near future is not in sight would tip the scales of justice in favour of bail, rather than jail, it is, however, correct, as argued by the learned Special Prosecutor that the prosecution cannot be blamed for delay in trial but it is equally correct that the petitioner too cannot be blamed for it when it was on account of belated arrest of one of the co-accused".
7. After having an overview of the principles laid down hereinabove, we are mindful of the fact that it is an inalienable right of every accused to have expeditious and fair trial, which right is even guaranteed under Article 10-A of. The Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973. Learned Special Prosecutor has even failed to give any definite time for the conclusion of trial. An accused person cannot be left at the mercy of the prosecution to rotten in jail for an indefinite period. The inordinate delay in the conclusion of trial of detained prisoners cannot be lightly ignored provided it was not caused due to any act or omission of accused. Delay in prosecution of accused amounts to abuse of process of law and is a valid ground for bailing out accused however, delay in prosecution of each case as a ground for bail is to be weighed and judged, in each case on its merits. In such an eventuality, the petitioner cannot be detained for an indefinite period.
Resultantly, we are inclined to allow this petition and enlarge the petitioner namely Mian Muhammad Sharif on bail subject to his furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs.5,00,000/-(rupees five lacs) each with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court.
8. Needless to observe that the observations made hereinabove are only tentative in their nature and are strictly confined to the extent of grant of instant bail.