1. ' This petition, filed by the State, is barred by no less than 290 days. Bail was granted to respondent, Muhammad Usman Farooqui by the High Court in the sum of Rs,1 million on 23-10-1998. No certified copy of such impugned order of the High Court was applied for up to 7-8-1999. What is more, the application for condonation of delay is manifestly silent as to the said period. For the sake of convenience we would reproduce here the relevant facts in the mentioned application. Such are these:--
(1) That the Hon'ble High Court granted bail to the respondent on 23-10-1998 in the sum of Rs, one million with P.R. Bond in the like amount.
(2) That the office of the petitioner applied for copy of order on 7-8-1999 and copy was made ready on 13-8-1999.
(3) That after obtaining copy of order, the office of the petitioner sent the same to the Ministry of Interior at Islamabad for approval of filing a petition for leave to appeal.
(4) That due to communication from one department to another and one authority to another for examination of the matter the petition could not be filed in time and that the time was consumed in office routine which was beyond the control of the petitioner/ department.
(5) That it is submitted that the case may be decided on merits as huge public revenue is involved therein. The respondent embezzled Federal Public Exchequer with millions of rupees and therefore, the matter may kindly be decided on merits."
2. This by any standard is a very serious matter. Not only a period of somewhat 10 months has remained totally unexplained but what is more, the explanation for the remaining period is also wholly insufficient.
3. ' The latest trend of the Court for such matters of delay where the State is involved is not merely to dismiss such petitions or pass such other appropriate orders as the circumstances of the case warrant but also to direct holding of appropriate inquiries at the Government level itself to find out the cause behind the relevant omissions and to initiate steps to forestall the recurrence of the same.
4. Accordingly we would direct Director FIA, State Bank Circle, who according to Mr. Ikhlaq Ahmad Siddiqui, is the Officer Incharge of the relevant section to hold necessary inquiry and to submit report to this Court within a period of three weeks. Like inquiry would be conducted in the office of Mr. Mubarrak Hassan Siddiqui, and as he is no more holding the office of Deputy Attorney-General for Pakistan, by his successor-in-office to find out as to what were the circumstances which led to the timely non-filing of the requisite application for certified copies of the impugned order. Such report shall be submitted to this Court within a period of six weeks because the new incumbent of the office of the Deputy Attorney-General may not be aware of the facts of this case.
5. ' Meanwhile because we observe that the High Court order may not only be erroneous but perhaps illegal, let notice be issued to the respondent for contesting this petition if that becomes necessary.