' GHULAM MAHMOOD QURESHI, J.--- The prosecution version as narrated in the F.I.R. In brief is that on pre-receipt information, Truck No,LHF-2433 driven by Amjad Hussain followed by Car No,RIK. 520 driven by . Muhammad Shoukat were intercepted by Custom Intelligence Staff. The search of Truck led to the recovery of 3848 kilograms Charas and on the basis of said recovery F.I.R. No,87 of 1995, dated 21-3-1995 was registered at Police Station Saddar Wazirabad under sections 156(1)(89) and 178 of Customs Act, 1969 and under Articles 3/4 of the Prohibition (Enforcement of Hadd) Order, 1979. In consequence of the abovesaid F.I.R., the petitioner was apprehended and since after his arrest i.e, 23-2-1998, he is behind the bar.
2. Petitioner moved a post-arrest bail before the Court of learned Special Judge Customs, Lahore which was dismissed on 13-7-2000.
3. We have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner at some length and have also perused the record. No one is present on behalf of the State.
4. The petitioner was arrested on 23-2-1998 and since then, he is linguishing in jail. The trial of the case has not so far been concluded. Bail application of the petitioner was dismissed by the Special Judge Customs, Lahore vide order, dated 13-7-2000 which reads as under:- "The petitioner is involved in a number of cases of similar nature which are pending against him in different Courts. The heinous nature of the offence in the light of the fact that he is involved in numerous similar cases indicates that he was a desperate temperament. The application is held to be without any force and the same is dismissed."
5. The ground on which the learned Special Judge Customs dismissed the bail application of the petitioner in itself is not a valid ground as held in Muhammad Rafique v. The State 1997 SCM R 412 wherein their Lordships while deciding the abovesaid case in para.4 observed:- ' "Fact that the petitioner is accused in a number of cases of robbery, is not sufficient to deprive him of his liberty."
' The other aspect of the case that the F.I.R. Was registered on 21-3-1995 and more than 5 years and 9 months have passed but the trial has not been concluded so far also goes in favour of the petitioner. The petitioner is, therefore, clearly entitled to the statutory benefit of clause (b) to the 3rd proviso to subsection (1) of section 497 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. See Muhammad Yousaf v. The State 2000 SCM R 79. Resultantly, the petitioner is granted bail provided he furnishes bail bonds in the sum of Rs,1,00,000 (one lac) with two sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court.