I don't know how many times do I have to make it understand people, judiciary cannot hold or release accused (crime is not yet proven, right?) at its whim. Bailable or non bailable pretty much depends on the nature of the FIR. It is not the magistrate or the judge who decides about the severity of the case but the police officer.
For example, according to PPC (Pakistan Penal Code), there are some 39 sections (299 to 338) in chapter XVI 'OF OFFENCES AFFECTING THE HUMAN BODY'. Depending on the crime scene, and after taking into account the witnesses (if any), and evidences (if any), the police officer would decide which section to apply to that particular crime scene. Some section are are bailable whereas others are non bailable. Now based on the section applied, witness, evidence, and after hearing arguments from the solicitors, the magistrate or the judge will decide whether to grant the bail or not. I have had chance to discuss the cases and personally witness the court proceedings in lower courts with my best friend, a session judge (martyred by Baloch insurgents in 2012, on his way to the court), and I know things don't happen the way people try to present them here.
Terrorists don't get bail because judiciary ain't doing its job, but primarily because of the poor FIR, and lack of evidence and witnesses. Judiciary has to base her decisions on the available laws given in the Penal Code. Does someone know PPC is composed of laws drafted in the year 1860? Naturally, a lot of things have changed since than. It was the job of the supposedly 'law makers' to have drafted or amended the PPC as per the changed circumstances. They never did their job, and found comfort in putting all the blame on the judiciary. It is funny isn't it; you don't give me a pen to write, and than blame me of not drafting the required piece.
Please also note that you cant expect a judicial magistrate or a session judge to take on terrorist as per your desire, because these poor souls have no security. Those who are brave enough end up in their graves like my friend, who was hearing the case of weapon trafficking against Barhamdagh Bugti. This is an irony, compare this to last week's news... Mr. Nisar (the interior minister) does not want to use the bullet-proof car, which was previously in use of the ex-interior minister, Mr. Malik. Reason given, the car was old and could have not protected against RPG, or IEDs.
My friend, it is very convenient for you to put all blame on the judiciary, but ask us, who have lost our finest, and loved ones in the judiciary.
Really? Are you? Is this the language you are taught in the law college? If this much respect you have for your chosen profession, than I can only pray for the judiciary to have her spared from your likes.