' The petitioners alongwith twelve others were proceeded against vide F.I.R. No, 184/92, dated 14-5- 1992, Police Station Saddar Rahimyar Khan under section 302/364/324/337-F/337-D/148/149, P.P.C.
2. The prosecution story briefly stated is that Mst. Yasmeen daughter of co-accused Muhammad Yaqoob married Yasin (a cousin of Ghulam Mustafa complainant) against the wishes of her elders.
A case was registered for the abduction against Yasin and others. On the fateful day and time, Yasin, Mst. Yasmin, complainant and other relatives were going to district Courts in connection with their pre-arrest bail in the case of abduction. When the wagon reached Rashid Abad, the petitioners alongwith others stopped the wagon, punctured the tyres by firing, entered the wagon and resorted to firing as a result of which Luqman and Hanif died and seven persons were injured.
Mst. Yasmin was dragged out of the wagon and subsequently murdered regarding which separate case was registered vide F.I.R. No,99/92 Police Station Saddar Sadiq Abad.
3. The bail is sought on the ground that the petitioners have not been ascribed any specific role in the commission of the offence and that according to police investigation, the petitioners were not even armed. The earlier bail petition of the petitioners bearing Criminal Miscellaneous No,593/B of 1992 was dismissed by this Court vide order, dated 30-11-1992. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that subsequent to the aforementioned order of this Court, the petitioners had filed a private complaint against the complainant party in which the learned trial Court has summoned them. According to the learned counsel this is a sufficient fresh ground to grant bail to the petitioners as their involvement in the occurrence in question has become a matter of further inquiry. The learned counsel for the State has opposed the bail.
4. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have also perused the record.
5. The petitioners were refused bail when this Court dismissed Criminal Miscellaneous Nos.593/B of 1992 and 554/B of 1992. The learned Judge had observed:--"I find that prima facie the acts of the petitioners made them vicariously liable for offences of murder, murderous assault, abduction with intention to murder etc. Which are punishable with death and imprisonment for more than ten years and thus their case is clearly covered by prohibitory clause of section 497, Cr.P.C. Hence they are not entitled to grant of bail. Both the petitions consequently are hereby dismissed."
6. I am afraid this Court had dismissed the bail petition through very exhaustive order touching the merits and all grounds available to the petitioners.
7. While pressing the ground of delay in trial, the learned counsel for the petitioner had referred to a judgment of this Court Khalid v. The State 1994 P Cr. L J 12 wherein bail was granted to the accused who was behind the bars for the last two years and the trial had not been concluded. I have gone through the judgment in that case. The question of delay in trial was also taken into account while granting bail but the merits of the case were given quite a weight as it was observed "He was alleged to have caused a fire-arm injury on the leg of Zafar Ali Shah P.W. Which was declared to be simple in nature". It was in this background that the petitioner-accused in that case was enlarged on bail. However, in the present case, as per F,I.R. All the petitioners were armed'' with fire-arms and they stopped the wagon of the complainant party, entered the same and killed two persons on the spot. Mst. Yasmin was dragged out of the wagon and she too was later on killed which murder is subject-matter of a separate F.I.R. The complainant, the two deceased, Mst. Yasmin and the I injured witnesses had come to the district Courts to seek protection of law (pre-arrest bail) were encircled and mercilessly killed. This is a rather desperate act on the part of the petitioners. Prima facie they are involved in offences which falls within the prohibitory clause of section 497 of the Cr.P.C. And also on account of their desperate character they are not entitled to bail. The petition is, therefore, dismissed.