ORDER-SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, CIRCUIT COURT LARKANA  

Crl. Bail Appln. No. S-  619  of 2017.

Date of hearing

Order with signature of Judge

21.05.2018.

          Mr. Faiz Muhammad Larik, Advocate for applicant.

          Mr. Shafi Muhammad Mahar, Advocate for complainant.

          Mr. Sharafuddin Kanhar, A.P.G.

~~~~~~~

Amjad Ali Sahito, J:    Through this application, applicant Ihsan Ahmed son of Bahar Khan alias Bijar Khan seeks his admission to post-arrest bail in Crime No.142 of 2017, registered with Police Station B-Section Kandhkot (District Kashmore @ Kandhkot), for offences punishable under Sections 302, 148 and 149 P.P.C.

          Heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and gone through the material available on record.

          It is matter of fact that, on merits bail plea of the applicant has been declined firstly by learned Sessions Judge, Kashmore @ Kandhkot vide his Order dated 25.3.2015; secondly by  learned 1^st Additional Sessions Judge, Kandhkot vide Order dated 20.09.2016, and thirdly by this Court vide dated 09.06.2017. However, this Court while refusing bail to the applicant directed trial Court to decide the case within a period of three months’ time, and after such time, the applicant repeated his bail application before trial Court, which has again been dismissed, hence instant bail application has been filed on behalf of applicant second time before this Court.

          Learned counsel for applicant empathized on the ground that the learned trial Court has failed to comply with directions of this Court and did not conclude the trial within the period as directed by this Court, and that the applicant is languishing in jail since more than two years without any progress in the trial, therefore, per learned counsel the applicant is entitled for grant of concession of bail.

          This Court had called progress report of the case from learned trial Court and it has been reported that, the trial has commenced and one of the witnesses namely, Tapedar Gul Hassan has already been examined, while examination-in-chief of the complainant has also been recorded. It has further been reported that the matter is being adjourned due to absence of one or other counsel representing the accused persons. It is further observed that the directions issued by this Court are not mandatory but directory in nature, as such the accused cannot claim bail on this ground as matter of right.

          Accordingly, the instant bail application stands dismissed. However, the trial Court is directed to pace-up the case by taking coercive steps for procuring attendance of prosecution witnesses and conclude the trial of the case within some reasonable time.

                                                                JUDGE

Ansari/*