1. ' The facts leading to the present application for bail are that applicant/accused Muhammad Amin is facing trial in Sessions Case No,25 of 1998 under section 395 read with section 34, P.P.C., before the learned 1st Additional Sessions Judge (Central) Karachi which has arisen out of F.I.R. No,275 of 1997 of Police Station Taimoria Karachi.
2. ' The brief facts of the prosecution case as disclosed in the F.I.R., are that complainant Saeed Yousif Siddique was sleeping in his house along with his family members when in the night at about 3045 a.m. He woke up on commotion. He noticed four youngsters duly armed with fire-arms. They took the son of complainant to Drawing Room and made him to sit there. On the resistance of his son culprits beat him. They also brought the ladies after abusing them to the drawing room where they were made to sit. Thereafter, one culprit who was duly armed kept guard over them. The remaining culprits took search of the house and took away golden ornaments, cash, wrist watches and Hi- roof vehicle bearing registration No,CF-9305 belonging to the complainant. They had entered in the house after cutting the grill of kitchen. In F.I.R., the complainant claimed that he can identify all the culprits.
3. ' After usual investigation, the applicant along with his companions was sent up to stand trial.
4. ' The applicant applied for bail before the Trial Court but his bail plea was dismissed by impugned order, dated 7-1-1999.
5. ' I have heard Mr. M.R. Syed learned counsel for the applicant and Mr. Muhammad Saleh Panhwar learned counsel on behalf of Advocate-General Sindh. The latter opposed the bail plea of the applicant.
6. ' At- the very outset learned counsel for applicant contended that he pressed the bail application on the ground of statutory delay only.
7. The perusal of record shows that applicant/accused along with his companions, duly armed with deadly weapons barged in the house of the complainant during odd hours of night by cutting the grill of the house from the side of kitchen. They overpowered the male members of the house and caused injuries to the son of complainant. They also hurled abuses at the women-folk and at the point of fire-arms wrongfully detained them in the drawing room of house. One of the culprits kept guard over the inmates of the house whereas the remaining culprits robbed the valuables, cash and car. The impugned order shows that trial in the case has started and four prosecution witnesses have been examined. The eyewitnesses i,e, complainant Syed Yousuf Siddique and his son Farhan Yousif have fully implicated the applicant and his companion in their evidence before the Court. They eye-witnesses had also picked out the applicant in identification test during course of investigation which was held before Judicial Magistrate. Recovery of some of the robbed property was also made from the possession of applicant. The case is at the verge of completion and no delay was caused due to any act or omission of the prosecution.
8. The manner in which the offence is alleged to have been committed leaves no room for doubt that the applicant and his companions are hardened criminals and their act amounts to terrorism.
9. Thus, for extending the benefit of proviso (3) to section 497(1), Cr.P.C., Court has to look to the act and manner in which the offence has been said to have been committed by the accused, as benefit of IIIrd proviso to section 497(1), Cr.P.C., cannot be extended to accused falling in the categories enumerated in the VIth proviso to section 497, Cr.P.C.
10. As already observed the act of applicant tantamounts to terrorism. He is, therefore, not entitled to bail on the ground of statutory delay and his bail plea stands dismissed.
11. ' The observations made hereinabove are of tentative nature and the Trial Court will not be influenced thereby in any manner at the time of final decision of the case and it will be free to arrive at its own findings and concludes the case after evaluating the evidence brought on record.