Al Wakeelo
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Official Citation: 2025 PHC 12
Court / Jurisdiction: Peshawar High Court
Year of Decision: 2025
Decision Date: 2025-02-10
Parties: Saifullah vs The State
Ruling Summary: This decision was rendered by the Peshawar High Court on 2025-02-10, officially reported as 2025 PHC 12. In this matter between Saifullah and The State, the court adjudicated key questions of statutory construction, procedural regularity, and legal precedent under Pakistani law.
Core Holding: The honorable bench evaluated governing statutory provisions and judicial authorities to establish the rights of the parties, delivering the binding reasoning set out below.
Case cited as 2025PHC12
Court Name: Peshawar High Court Judge(s): Abdul Fayaz Title: Saifullah vs The State Case No.: Cr. Misc. (B.A) No. 33-M/2025 Date of Judgment:2025-02-10 Reported As: 2025 PHC 12, 2025 PTD 495 Result: Petition Allowed
Judgment
ORDER ABDUL FAYAZ, J.- Through this application, the accused petitioner Saifullah son of Umar Zada seeks his post arrest bail on fresh ground of statutory delay in his trial in case FIR No. 244 dated 30.06.2024 under Sections 302/324/34/201/337-D PPC, 15 A.A. of P.S Kabal, District Swat. 2. Allegations against the petitioner are that he and his co-accused, in furtherance of their common intention, committed murder of Shan Zeb and attempted at the life of complainant Mst. Sheema by firing at them. 3. After arrest of the petitioner on 02.07.2024, he filed bail application before the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Swat at Kabal, who dismissed the same on merits vide order dated 03.08.2024 and his subsequent bail petition was also dismissed by this Court vide order dated 27.09.2024. Thereafter, the petitioner filed bail application before the learned trial Court on the ground of statutory delay, however, his prayer for bail was turned down vide order dated 17.01.2025, hence, this petition. 4. Arguments heard and record perused. 5. The record transpires that the petitioner was arrested on 02.07.2024, as such, he is behind the bars for more than seven months. The learned Court below has refused bail to petitioner mainly on the ground that the trial against the petitioner has not yet commenced which shows the lethargic conduct of prosecution. The petitioner was admittedly a juvenile being below the age of 18 years at the time of occurrence. According to Section 6(5) of the Juvenile Justice System Act, 2018, a juvenile shall be released on bail if he has been detained for a continuous period exceeding six months provided the delay in trial of juvenile has not been occasioned by his act or omission or
---
## Page 2
any person acting on his behalf. It is settled law that the period of delay in conclusion of trial is to be counted from the date of the detention of the accused in the case. Since, late commencement of trial is not the fault of the petitioner, therefore, he is entitled to the concession of bail on the ground of statutory delay in conclusion of his trial. Reliance in this regard is placed on "Khawar and others" (PLD 2022 S.C 551) wherein the apex Court granted bail to juvenile accused by observing that: "In the present case, the courts below have failed to appreciate the scheme of the Act and in particular that of Section 6(5) of the Act, which has been enacted to counter the negative effects of long term detention of the juveniles in jail. The Courts below have thus committed a patent error of law by not allowing the benefit of Section 6(5) of the Act to the petitioner when the delay in completion of the trial was not attributable to any act or omission or of any other person acting on his behalf". 6. For the reasons discussed above, this petition is allowed and the petitioner is directed to be released on bail subject to furnishing his bail bonds in the sum of Rs.500,000/- (five hundred thousand) with two sureties each in the like amount to satisfaction of area Judicial Magistrate/MoD, who shall ensure that the sureties are local, reliable and men of means. 7. Above are the reasons of my short order of the even date.