1. The facts leading to the present application for bail are that applicants Riaz Ahmed, Shahzad Farooq and Tariq Hameed are facing trial in Sessions Case No,331 of 1999 before learned IIIrd Additional Sessions Judge, Karachi under section 392/34, P.P.C. It arose out of F.I.R. No,27 of 1999 of Police Station Federal "B" Area, (Industrial) Karachi.
2. The brief facts of the prosecution case as disclosed by the complainant Mazhar Hussain in his F.I.R.
3. Lodged on 10-8-1999 are that on the fateful day he was driving yellow cab and when he reached near Power House Federal "B" Area, Shah Waliullah Road, Karachi, three persons hired his Taxi for going to Nepa Chowrangi. They boarded in the taxi and when they reached near P.S.O. Petrol Pump, Block No,21, Rashid Minhas Road, the said culprits took out their pistols and at gun-point snatched the keys of the taxi from the complainant and drove it away.
4. After usual investigation the police sent up the applicants/accused to stand trial.
5. The applicants/accused applied for bail before the trial Court but it was declined by the impugned order, dated 15-2-2000.
6. I have heard Mr. Gulzar Hassan, Advocate for the applicants/ accused and Mr. Jawed Akhtar, Advocate, on behalf of Advocate-General for the State. The latter has opposed the bail plea of the applicants/accused.
7. The perusal of record shows that on 17-8-1999 during the checking of vehicles the police party of Clifton Police Station apprehended the applicants/accused while they were sitting in the snatched car. The robbed vehicle was secured from their possession under memo. Of recovery. The custody of the applicants/accused was handed over to F.B Area Police Station A for further investigation in the matter. On 23-8-1999 identification parade of the applicants/accused was held before the Judicial Magistrate VIth, Karachi through eye-witness of the occurrence. The complainant correctly picked out the applicants/accused in the identification test. The contention that identification was not according to law as applicant Tariq Hameed was shown standing at serial No,9 in the identification test. This contention is misconceived. It is not pointed out that what prejudice was caused to the applicants. It is well-settled that for the purpose of bail only tentative assessment is to be made and deeper appreciation of the evidence is not warranted by law. The identification test is not a requirement of law but it is only one of the methods to test the veracity of the evidence of an eye-witness who has had an occasion to see the accused and claims to identify the accused. In this context I am fortified by the decision in case of Muhammad Akbar v. The State reported in 1998 SCM R 2538. Consequently this bail application stands dismissed.
8. The observation made hereinabove are of tentative nature and trial Court shall not be influenced thereby in any manner at the time of final adjudication of the case, after the evidence is adduced by the parties.