' This is an application for grant of bail by Ibrahim.
2. His bail applications (Crl. Misc. Ni. 280-13-76 and Crl. Misc. No, 4163-B-76), were dismissed on merits. He has now applied for bail on the ground of "inordinate delay" in the completion of the trial.
3. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the F. I. R. In this case was lodged on 20-6-1975, the petitioner was arrested soon thereafter, and that since about 20 months have passed, but the trial has not taken place as yet and is likely to be further delayed in view of large number of cases accumulated in the Court of learned Se ions Judge, because of the recent amendment in the Criminal Procedure Code, doing away with the commitment proceedings.
4. The learned State Counsel opposed the application.
5. I am of the view that in the circumstances prevailing at present, delay of 20 months is not inordinate. It is correct that because of the recent amendment in the Criminal Procedure Code, a large number of cases have been sent up directly, to the Court of Session and a number of such cases are pending before various learned Sessions Judges and delay is, therefore, likely to occur. If the above-mentioned contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is accepted, then almost all persons accused of murder must be released on bail forthwith and let loose on public. Moreover a number of new Additional Sessions Judges are likely to be appointed in the near future. However, the petitioner would be entitled to grant of bail if there is further delay and his case is covered by the dictum of Insar Hussain v. The State (Cr. P. S. t.. A. No, 394/75).
' The application is, therefore, dismissed.