PESHAWAR, Jan 9: An amendment to the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC) made by the federal government regarding bail provision has placed a large number of under-trial prisoners (UTPs) at a disadvantage.

Through the Criminal Procedure (Amendment) Ordinance 2001, promulgated on Oct 10 last year, the government has omitted the third and the fourth provisos to section 497 of the CrPC, dealing with the provision of bail on ground of statutory delay at the conclusion of a trial.

Under the third proviso, any person should be released on bail who, being accused of any offence not punishable by death, has been detained for such offence for a continuous period exceeding one year and whose trial for such offence has not concluded.

Similarly, a person accused of an offence punishable by death should be released on bail if he has been detained for a continuous period exceeding two years and his trial has not concluded.

A lawyer dealing with criminal cases informed Dawn that the step taken by the government would deprive hundreds of prisoners across the country of their right to be released on bail despite delay in the conclusion of their trials.

In Pakistan, he said, the prosecution was habitual of delaying submission of chargesheets of cases before the courts concerned and prisoners had been languishing for many years without trial. With the omission of the third proviso from the CrPC, he added, such prisoners would continue to suffer.

The third proviso to section 497 of the CrPC was introduced through Ordinance No. LXXI of 1979. Similarly, the 4th proviso was added through the Ordinance XXXII of 1983. In 1993 when Asif Ali Zardari had been behind the bars for almost three years and none of his cases had been decided, the then government omitted these provisos so that he could not get bail. The two provisos were reinstated by the Act XIX of 1994 by the government of Benazir Bhutto.

Another lawyer told Dawn that under section 173 of the CrPC it was legally binding to complete investigation into a matter within 14 days from the date of registration of the FIR, failing which an interim report was to be forwarded to the court concerned and the court should commence the trial on the basis of such report.

 However, he added, the prosecution and courts very rarely followed that provision and the accused continued to rot in prison for many years. He said that in the presence of the third proviso an accused had the opportunity to apply for bail in case of delay on part of the prosecution, but now prisoners had been left on the mercy of prosecution and courts.