M. JAVED BUTTAR, J.--- The petitioner, Nadeem Butt, is seeking post-arrest bail in case F.I.R. No,495 of 1996, dated 13-12-1996 registered at Police Station Nawan Kot, Lahore for the offences under sections 302/452/34, P.P.C. At the instance of complainant Muhammad Zahid, for an occurrence which is alleged to have taken place at 7-40 p.m. In which Rana Abdul Majeed, brother of the complainant, got killed due to firearm injuries which are attributed to the petitioner and to co- accused Pervaiz Butt, who were armed with pistols while the other co-accused namely Bashir Ahmad Khan and Ishtiaq alias Ghunti, are alleged to have raised Lalkara and resorted to ineffective firing with their .30 bore pistols. The co-accused Ishtiaq alias Ghunti was granted bail by the Sessions Judge whereas Bashir Ahmad Khan was granted bail by our learned brother Karamat Nazir Bhandari, J. The matter thereafter was finally referred to Anti-Terrorism Court, hence it has become a Division Bench matter and, therefore, we have decided to proceed with the matter instead of referring this petition for hearing to our learned brother Karamat Nazir Bhandari, J.
2. The petitioner was arrested on 13-12-1996. His application for the grant of post-arrest bail has been dismissed by the Special Judge, Anti-Terrorism Court on 12-1-1999. The trial has commenced and statements of six prosecution witnesses have been recorded.
3. It is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has been involved falsely in the present case, he was not present on the spot, in the F.I.R. It has been alleged that the petitioner sustained injuries on his person as he himself hit a door whereas P.W.6 Dr. Hamid Bashir in his examination-in-chief, before the trial Court, has stated that three injuries suffered by the petitioner could not be the result of hitting a door and the same are result of scuffle due to forceful blows on the eyebrow and as the F.I.R. Version has been belied by the medical evidence, therefore, the petitioner's version that he was not present on the spot; is to be believed. The bail is being sought on statutory ground also as the petitioner is behind the bars for the last three years ten months and eighteen days. The contentions have been opposed by the learned counsel for the State.
4. In the F.I.R. The petitioner has been attributed a fire-arm injury to the deceased on the right hip of the deceased, eye-witnesses are fully supporting the prosecution version in this regard and, therefore, in our opinion, the petitioner is not entitled to the grant of bail on merits. We have gone through the interim orders passed by the learned trial Court, the same show that the case has been shunted many times from the Court of ordinary criminal jurisdiction to the Court of Special Judge, Anti-Terrorism, then back to the Sessions Court and then again to the Special Judge, Anti- Terrorism. This shows that throughout this period, the accused side has been actively trying to stop the Special Judge, Anti-Terrorism from proceeding with the case with a view that they are tried by a Criminal Court of general jurisdiction. The delay, therefore, in the early conclusion of the trial is attributable to the petitioner also. Even otherwise we are not inclined to release the petitioner on bail at this stage when the trial has commenced, the statements of six prosecution witnesses have been recorded because the sank can result in the prejudice to the complainant's case.
5. In view of the abovementioned, this application having no merit is dismissed with a direction to the trial Court to proceed with the trial expeditiously and to conclude the same within a period of two months.