1. ' SYED HASAN AZHAR RIZVI, J.---This bail application is filed by the applicants after rejection of their bail application vide order dated 3-8-2011 passed by the IIIrd Additional Sessions Judge, Karachi-East. Earlier the applicants had also filed bail application which was rejected on 13-11-2010.
2. ' Precisely, the facts of the case are that applicant No,1 came at the shop of the complainant situated in Saddar and told him that his boss deals in mobile phones and computers, who is residing at Bungalow No,B-70, Block- 18, Gulshan-e-Iqbal, Karachi. Complainant along with his brother Mansoor visited that bungalow where applicant No,3 shown them samples of mobile phones and laptops and on 31-5-2010 complainant and his brother went at the house of the applicants and paid Rs,700,000 to the applicant No,3, who after receipt of the said amount told the complainant that he would give articles to them at Customs Office at Airport, Karachi but those articles were never delivered to them. On 13-6-2010 complainant along with his brother went at bungalow of the applicants where the applicant No,1 on the point of pistol told the complainant to forget the amount/articles/goods and leave the place otherwise, they would lose their lives. Applicant No,1 was also arrested in F.I.R. No,435 of 2010 of the same Police Station while the applicant No,3 was already in jail in F.I.R.
3. No,499 of 2010 of same Police Station. Challan has already been submitted and complainant and his brother have already been examined before the Trial Court.
4. ' Learned counsel for the applicants submits that there is inordinate delay of more than three and half months in lodging the F.I.R., there is no allegation against the applicants Nos.1 and 2, despite knowledge of the names of the accused/applicants complainant did not lodge any complaint against them, no recovery of any amount or weapon has been made from the applicants. Offence alleged against the applicants does not come within the prohibitory clause, therefore, applicants are entitled for bail.
5. ' Whereas learned A.P.-G. Has vehemently opposed the grant of bail to the applicants. Complainant was also present at the time of hearing. Learned A.P.-G. Has placed on record several un-reported judgments of the honourable Supreme Court of Pakistan, wherein bail application of the present applicants were dismissed. In C.R., PLA No,531-K of 2010 by the order dated 11-8-2011 the honourable Apex court observed that more than
(31) criminal cases along with (14) other cases are pending against the respondent No,1 (Naeem-ur-Rehman Khan Niazi), applicant No,3 in the present bail application. It was further observed that "A large number of cases are pending against the respondent No,1 (applicant No,3) and tentatively we are of the view that he repeated the same offence time and again". The honourable apex Court while converting Criminal Petition for leave to appeal into appeal and set aside the bail granting order in favour of the applicant No,3 in the present bail application, passed by the High Court with direction to the trial Court to expedite the proceedings and decide the same preferably within four months from the date of the order. In Criminal Petition No,48-K/2011 view order dated 15-6-2011 the honourable Apex Court did not incline to admit the applicants on bail. In Criminal Bail Application No,527 of 2011 arising out of F.I.R. No,585 of 2010 of the same Police Station disposed of the bail application of the applicants as not pressed with direction to conclude the trial within a period of two months.
6. ' I have heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned Assistant Prosecutor-General and perused the record carefully.
7. It appears from the record that the modus operandi of the applicants are almost same in all the cases referred to above and they have deprived number of persons from their savings and robbed heavy/huge amount from the innocent persons, which infers that the applicants are habitual and desperate criminals against whom several other cases of like nature are also pending, therefore, the applicants are not entitled for concession of grant of bail. Two of the main/star witnesses have already been examined by the trial Court, who have implicated the applicants in the present offence and also disposed their roles at the time of incident and identified them before the trial Court. Hence, Bail application is dismissed and the Trial Court is directed to conclude the trial within a period of two months from receipt of this order.
8. ' The observations made are of tentative nature and the trial court shall not be prejudiced by any of such observations.
9. ' Above are the reasons of my short order announced on 27-10-2011.