The petitioner , namely , Sunny Abbas through the instant petition seeks post arrest bail in case FIR No. 2421 dated 27.11.2019 registered at P .S. South Gantt District Lahore of fences under Sections 392/41 1 of PPC.
2. As per police report, the complainant has been served with the notice of this case but no one appeared on his behalf despite repeated calls. Even otherwise, it is a State case and learned Addl.
Prosecutor General for the State is ready to argue the same therefore, I proceed to decide the instant petition after hearing the arguments of learned couns el for-the petitioner , learned Addl. Prose cutor General for the State and perusing the record.
3. Arguments heard. Record perused.
4. This is 3rd post arrest bail petition filed by the petitioner before this Court. Earlier 1st post arrest bail petition of the petitioner bearing, Crl. Misc. No. 31826-B of 2020 was dismissed due to non-prosecution vide order dated 15.07.2020, whereas, 2nd post arrest bail petition of the petitioner bearing Crl. Misc. No. 56707-B of 2020 was dismissed as having not been pressed after arguing the case at some length vide order dated 17.12.2020. The instant 3rd post arrest bail petition has been filed by the petitioner on the fresh ground of delay in conclusion of the trial. I have noted that as per police record, the petitioner has been arrested in this case on 19.12.2019. Report under Section 173 of Cr.P.0 was furnished before the learned trial Court on 04.03.2020 & charge was framed against the petitioner on 19.10.2020. Learned counsel for the petitioner has produced before the Court today an attested copy of the complete order sheet of the learned trial Court. Perusal of the attested copy of the order sheet of the learned trial Court shows that neither the complainant nor the prosecution witnesses appeared before the learned trial Court on a single date of hearing of this case despite issuance of bailable & non-bailable warrants of arrest against them. Case was adjourn ed before the learned trial Court on account of leave of the learned Presiding Officer, due to non-production of the accused persons from jail due to the situation created by COVID-19 or on account of non-appearance of the complainant and the prosecution witnesses before the learned trial Court.
It is also noteworthy that the complainant has been served with the notice of the instant bail petition and despite the service, he did not bother to appear before this Court which shows his lack of interest in the prosecution of the present case. The petitioner cannot be kept behind the bars for an indefinite period without any fault on his part.
The petitioner has therefore, earned statu tory right to be released on bail as envisaged under the 3rd provision of Section 497(1)(a) of Cr.P.C. Although learned Addl. Prosecutor General has argued that the petitioner is involved in four other criminal cases but he has conceded on instructions that there is no record of previous conviction of the petitioner in any other case. Moreover , it is by now well settled that mere involvement of an accused in some other criminal cases is not sufficient to refuse him bail if otherwise he is entitled to the said relief on merits. Reliance in this respect may be placed on the cases reported as 'Muhammad Rafique vs. The State' (1997 SCMR 412) & Jamal-ud-Din alias Zubair Khan vs. The State (2012 SCMR 573). There is nothing on the record to show that the petitioner is previously convicted offender for an offence punishable with death or imprisonment for life or he is hardened, desperate or dangerous criminal or he is accused of an act of terrorism punishable with death or imprisonment for life. As the petitioner has earned statutory right under the aforementioned provision of law therefore, this petition is allowed and the petitioner is admitted to bail after arrest subject to his furnishing the bail bonds in the sum of Rs. 200,000/- (Rupees two hundred thousand only) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court.