1. This is an application on behalf Of Hussain son of Ramzan seeking bail in case Crime No.101/1984 registered on 1-10-1984 by S.H.O. Haroon Khan of Police Station Thariri Mohabat District Dadu under section 302/307/353/ 364/332/148/149, P.P.C. Read Article 17(3) of Hudood Ordinance.
2. This is third bail application repeated by the applicant. The previous two bail applications were also heard by me on '11=12-1988 and 19-3-1989 and both the applications were dismissed.
3. I have heard Mr. Ghulam Shabbir, learned counsel for the applicant. He has pressed the application on the similar grounds mainly, the ground of inordinate delay in the disposal of the case. I would like to mention that according to me; there is no exceptional ground taken by the learned counsel, which could persuade me to change my previous opinion formed by me in the earlier two bail applications decided by me.
4. Mr. Salman Ansari, the learned counsel has appeared on behalf of the A.-G. For the Sate. I have heard both the learned counsel. Mr. Salman Ansari has vehemently opposed the bail application on the ground that on the same ground of delay twice the bail application has been dismissed and that the applicant is required in 12 similar cases and is reported to be dangerous man, hence he has made out no case to earn benefit of proviso (3) to section 497, Cr.P.C.
5. Legislature qualified this proviso with the fourth proviso which was added in 1983 in the following words: "Provided further that the provisions of the third proviso shall not apply to a previously convicted offender or to a person who in the opinion of the Court is hardened, desperate or dangerous criminal.
6. Mr. Salman Ansari, the learned counsel for the State has made a statement that applicant is facing trials in similar cases and this has not been controverted by the counsel for the applicant. In my view the person desperate and dangerous is a personal attribute and is important consideration in arriving at such opinion, which is of course is an opinion determined as a tentative opinion in this behalf. Court can form such opinion on the basis of:'
(i) nature of accusation and conduct of accused at the time of alleged incident:
(ii) previous record of the accused which may include his earlier prosecution, (i.e) the material before the trial court and with the Investigating Agency and also reports of police and jail authorities.
7. It is the cumulative effect of all these aspects by which Court can determine a tentative opinion in this behalf. In the instant case there is evidence available of three injured witnesses and three police constables killed in the attack of dacoits.
8. The Application was dismissed by me vide short order passed today morning and these are the reasons for the same.