' The petitioner Maqsood Akhtar son of Allah Rakha, a Danish National, was proceeded against on a report F.I.R. No,66 of 1993, dated 9-9-1993 lodged at Police Station, P.N.C.B., F.I.U.-II, Karachi, under Articles 3/4 of the Prohibition (Enforcement of Hadd) Order, 1979 on the alleged recovery of 2,950 grams of heroin powder from his luggage when he was leaving for Dubai by Flight No,EK-603 on the intervening night on 26/27 May, 1993 at Quaid-e-Azam International Airport, Karachi.
2. This Criminal Miscellaneous Application No,99/I of 1994 directed against the order dated 5-4- 1994 of the learned Sessions Judge, Karachi East whereby his bail application was dismissed, was admitted to regular hearing on 27-6-1994 when a notice was also given to the State. On 24-7-1994 permission was granted to the learned counsel for the petitioner for filing of documents in support of the bail application with the direction that copies of the same may be supplied to the learned counsel for the State in advance.
3. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have perused the record with their assistance. It transpires from record that the learned Special Judge, Custom and Taxation, Karachi vide his judgment, dated 19-9-1993, after having gone through the Medical Certificate, granted bail to the petitioner/accused in the sum of Rs,1,00,000 and P.R. Bonds in the like amount. The said medical certificates, issued by the R.M.O., National Institute of Cardiovascular Disease, Karachi on 14-3-1993 and again on 26-5-1993, reveal" that the petitioner/accused is suffering from unstable Angina, hypertension and Ishemic heart disease.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is a serious and chronic patient of Ishemic heart disease and his detention is such that his stay in jail would be detrimental to his life. He prayed that the case of petitioner falls under first proviso of section 497(1), Cr.P.C. And he was entitled to grant of bail accordingly. He further submitted that the petitioner/accused is in custody for the last over a year, since 27-5-1993, and there is no progress in the trial. He stated at the bar that even the challan has not been submitted so far. The learned counsel for the petitioner in support of his bail invoked the provisions of third proviso of section 497, Cr.P.C. He placed reliance on 1986 SCM R 847, 1986 P Cr. L J 1022, 1990 SCM R 1045 and 1990 SCM R 1090.
5. The learned counsel for the State vehemently opposed the grant of bail to the petitioner, inter alia, on the ground that the petitioner is a Danish national who is involved in a heinous offence of transporting a huge quantity of narcotics and is likely to make good his escape if enlarged on bail.
He also submitted that copies of the documents were not supplied to him, as required.
6. I have thoroughly considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties. The ground of delay of about 14 months in the start of the trial was not agitated by the appellant earlier before the trial Court, for the reasons that at that time one year had not been completed. There is no satisfactory explanation why the trial has not been started and even the challan has not been submitted so far. There is nothing on the record to show that the petitioner is a previous convict/offender or could be said in the opinion of the Court to be hardened, desperate or dangerous criminal. In view of this the benefit of aforementioned proviso cannot be denied to the appellant. Although the petitioner is a Danish National but there is also nothing in the law to justify refusal of the grant of bail to him if he otherwise satisfies the Court that he will always be available to appear before the trial Court during the proceedings whenever required.
7. Consequently in the circumstances, this application is allowed and the petitioner is admitted to bail in the sum of Rs,2,00,000 (two lacs) with two sureties, who are citizen of Pakistan, in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court. The Passport and other relevant documents of the petitioner shall remain in custody with the prosecution agency as long as required. The learned trial Court while granting bail to the petitioner may like to impose certain terms and conditions on him in this respect, as deemed necessary according to law.