2000 P Cr (PLP)

Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)‑‑‑ ‑‑‑‑S. 497‑‑‑Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S.302/324/452/436/148/149‑‑‑Bail, grant of‑‑‑Accused persons formed themselves into an unlawful assembly and thereafter, arming themselves with deadly weapons, launched a planned and premeditated attack‑‑‑Four persons were murdered and two had received serious injuries as a result of their aggression‑‑‑Accused persons acted in extremely brutal and desperate manner and not only they committed murders, but also set the house of victim on fire after pushing one of the deceased into that house which created terror and panic in the area‑‑‑Accused persons, who remained fugitive from law, were specifically named in F.I.R. and they acted in prosecution of their common object of committing murder and arson‑‑ Accused, who had prayed for grant of bail on ground of statutory delay, could be extended concession of bail on that ground only if their case was covered by third proviso to S.497, Cr.P.C. but said third proviso had been qualified by fourth proviso to S.497, Cr.P.C. according to which accused was not entitled to concession of bail if he was previous convict, habitual offender or was hardened, desperate or .dangerous criminal or involved in terrorism‑‑‑Manner in which offence was committed, accused had been proved to be dangerous and desperate persons‑‑‑Accused in circumstances were not entitled to bail. Shah Ahmad Khan Baloch for the Complainant. Ikram Nasir for the State. ORDER This order will dispose of Criminal Miscellaneous No.3161/B of 1998, moved on behalf of Waris, Sarfraz, Boota and Nasir, Criminal Miscellaneous No.2175/BC of 1999 moved against Iqbal Hussain and suo Motu Criminal Miscellaneous No.3656/BC of 1998 initiated against Muhammad Nawaz and Pervaiz.

2. All these accused stand involved in case F:I.R. No.13, dated 12‑1‑1996 registered with Police Station Sadar Nankana, District Sheikhupura, on the statement of one Muhammad son of Wahab.

3. Briefly the prosecution case is that on 12‑1‑1996 the complainant alongwith his son* Bashir Ahmad and Mian Hakim Ali was cutting fodder when five accused persons namely Kalb‑e‑Hussain, Tayyab, Nawaz, Nasir and Naseer emerged there. They were all armed with fire‑arms and caused injuries on the person of Sohawa, his son Sharif and Nazra. Thereafter, all the aforesaid accused persons resorted to indiscriminate firing. In the meanwhile, Mulazim Hussain, Iqbal Hussain, Waris, Sarfraz, Muhammad Ali., Boota, Pervaiz, Yousaf and Khizar Hayat all armed with fire‑arms also reached the place of occurrence raising Lalkaras and caused injuries on the person of Willayat and Yasin. Waris, Muhammad Ali, Boota and Yousaf caught hold of Wilayat injured and threw him in a room packed with Parali and chaff and set the same on fire. Willayat, Sohawa and Sharif succumbed to the injuries. The accused persons committed murder of four persons and caused fire‑arm injuries to two persons, as such six persons from complainant side fell victim to their aggression. All the accused persons have been specifically named in the F.I.R. The arms carried by them have also been specified and their roles being members of the unlawful assembly have also been prescribed. The motive was stated to be that Irshad etc. had a quarrel with Mulazim over a piece of land about 3/4 months prior to the occurrence but on the intervention of the respectables, the dispute was patched up but the accused persons did not accept the same and retained the grudge. As a result of which they committed the aforesaid aggression resulting in death of four persons and injuries on the person of two. Waris, Boota, Sarfraz and Nasir petitioners in Criminal Miscellaneous No. 6151/13 of 1998 moved an application for grant of bail in the Court of Mr. Muhammad Mujahid Hussain, Judge, Special Court under Suppression of Terrorist Activities Act, 1975. The learned trial Judge vide his order, dated 3‑6‑1998 dismissed their application. Iqbal Hussain accused moved an application for bail on the ground of statutory delay which was accepted by the learned Special Judge vide his order, dated 16‑3‑1999 observing that he remained in the judicial lock‑up for more than three years as under‑trial prisoner and in view of the proviso to section 497, Cr.P.C. he was entitled to the concession of bail.

4. As described above the accused persons formed themselves into an unlawful assembly and thereafter, launched a planned and premeditated aggression while arming themselves with deadly weapons. As a result of their aggression four persons were murdered and two received serious injuries. The accused persons acted in extremely brutal and desperate manner, not only they committed murderous assault as a result of which they committed murders but also set the property on fire after pushing one of the deceased into Haveli before setting it to fire which obviously, created terror and panic in the area. The accused persons remained fugitive from law as well. Obviously, on merits none of the accused persons petitioners and the accused to whom show‑cause notice for cancellation of their bail has been issued deserve bail. All of them‑have been specifically named in the F.I.R. and they acted in prosecution of their common object of committing murders and arosen. Petitioners Waris, Sarfraz, Boota and Nasir who are in custody pray for grant of bail on the ground of statutory delay. The accused persons can be extended the concession of bail if their case is covered by third proviso to section 497, Cr.P.C. that trial could not conclude within a period of two years but the third proviso has subsequently. been qualified by the fourth proviso according to which an accused person is not entitled to the concession of bail if he is previous convict, habitual offender or who in the opinion of the Court is hardened, desperate or dangerous criminal or involved in terrorism. In the instant case the manner in which the offence is committed speak by itself that aforesaid petitioners as well as the three accused namely Nawaz, Iqbal Hussain and Pervaiz are dangerous and E3 desperate persons. They are not entitled to the concession extended by third proviso to section 497, Cr.P.C. We accordingly dismiss Criminal Miscellaneous No.3161/B of 1998 moved by Waris, Sarfraz, Boota and Nasir.

5. For the reasons recorded above, we are of the view that Nawaz and Pervaiz respondents in Suo Motu Criminal Miscellaneous No.3656/BC of 1998 and Iqbal Hussain respondent in Criminal Miscellaneous No.2175/BC of 1998 have been wrongly admitted to bail by the learned Special Judge. They do not deserve this concession, therefore, bail granted to them is hereby withdrawn and cancelled. The accused shall surrender, to be taken into custody forthwith. H.B.T./W‑10/L Bail application dismissed.