' By this order, I propose to dispose of Criminal Bail Application No,59/2001, arising out of crime F.I.R.
No,82/1998, Police Station Waggan, for offences under sections 302, 324, 504, 337-A(i) read with section 34, P.P.C. The bail plea of the applicant was dismissed by the learned IVth Additional Sessions Judge, Larkana, vide order, dated 11-1-2001.
2. The prosecution story, as enunciated in the F.I.R., shows that on 1-8-1998 at about 7-30 p.m., complainant Muhammad Uris Tunio appeared at Police Station Drigh and lodged F.I.R. Alleging that on the eventful day, at 6-00 p.m., as the complainant was giving bath to buffaloes and his son was sitting on a raised mud, accused 1. Abdul Sattar,
2. Abdul Ghafoor, both sons of Muhammad Bachal, and 3. Kamil, son of Qazi Muhammad Bux, emerged there. Out of them Abdul Sattar was armed with pistol, Abdul Ghafoor was carrying a hatchet and accused Kamil was armed with a gun. Abdul Sattar abused Abid Hussain and asked-him as to why they were stopped from coming to their village but they persisted on which they were warned. At this, Abid Hussain and accused Abdul Sattar exchanged abuses with each other which resulted in scuffle between the two and as a consequence of the fight, Abid Hussain and accused Abdul Sattar sustained injuries. Thereafter, accused Abdul Sattar fired twice from his pistol, hitting the complainant, who fell down by raising cries. Accused Kamil fired at Abid Hussain and after receipt of shot he fell down. Accused Kamil fired second shot which hit Abid Hussain. As a consequence of the firing. Taufiq Ahmed and Abdul Ghafoor Shaikh also sustained injuries. On fire-arm reports, several persons of the vicinity, including Khadim Hussain and Fida Hussain, attracted at the spot. At this juncture, Abdul Ghafoor gave sharp side hatchet blow to Abid Hussain, who was already lying on the ground. The F.I.R. Further shows that one Mst. Najma Khatoon wife of Muhammad Yamin Shaikh also came running from her house alongwith other women. During the course of firing as she was standing alongwith other ladies in front of her house, the same being located at the Shakh, she was dragged by her arms and was fired at with gun which hit her and she fell down. Several persons of the village came running by giving Hakals but the accused stopped them disclosing that they should not interfere as Mst.
Najma Khatoom is Kari with Abid Hussain and it was on account of the said grudge that they both have been killed. Thereafter, the accused decamped from the scene of offence. Leaving the witnesses and village people on the corpse of the deceased, complainant approached the concerned police station where an F.I.R. Was recorded as above. After usual investigation, the case was sent up for trial in the Court of Incharge 4th Additional Sessions Judge, Larkana.
3. I have heard the learned counsel for the respective parties and also perused the record. The bail plea on behalf of the applicants was urged on the ground of statutory delay as the applicant Abdul Sattar was arrested on 1-8-1998 and the rest two were arrested on 10-8-1998 respectively. It has been further argued that the delay in trial is neither on the part of the applicants nor any person acting on their behalf as the case is in formal stage and no charge has been framed and, therefore, the case of the applicants is not hit by the third proviso to section 497(i), Cr.P.C.
Regarding fourth proviso, it has been submitted that reports from the concerned Police Station Wagan and Jail Superintendent, Larkana, were called. Both the reports show that rio material was available against the applicants. It has been further argued that from the facts and circumstances of the case in hand, the applicants could not be termed or treated as desperate, dangerous or hardened criminals within the meaning of third proviso to section 497(i), Cr.P.C. He has referred to the following case-law and prays for grant of bail to the applicants.
(1) Nasrullah and another v. The State (1998 PCr.LJ 76).
(2) Raheem Bux and another v. The State (PLD 1986 Karachi 224).
(3) Wazir and another v. The State (PLD 1986 Kar. 646).
(4) Nazar Muhammad The State (Cr. Bail Application No, 14/2000), and
(5) Dur Muhammad Brohi v. The State (Cr. Bail Application No,522/2000).
4. Mr. Gul Hassan Solangi, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State, supported the arguments of the learned counsel for the applicants and raised no objection for the grant of bail.
5.. I have heard the arguments of respective parties and also examined the record in minute details. Facts and circumstances of the prosecution case in which the accused persons are seeking release of the applicants on bail while facing trial, can be taken into consideration for the grant or refusal of bail. The perusal of record shows that it is a case involving no background of enmity. The three applicants, making themselves duly armed with deadly weapons, emerged at the scene of offence, indulged in reckless firing and acted so ruthlessly such as grappling and dragging Mst. Najma Khatoon while she was standing outside her house, killing two persons namely Abid Hussain and Mst. Najma Khatoon and causing serious injuries to two more namely Taufiq and Abdul Sattar. All this is indicative of the fact that the applicants are desperate, dangerous and hardened criminals within the meaning of fourth proviso to section 497(1), Cr.P.C.
Reference is made to a case of Moundar and others v. The State (PLD 1990 SC 934). In the cited case, the facts and circumstances of the case in hand were taken into consideration while deciding the bail plea of applicants. The law cited at the Bar has no relevancy on the facts and circumstances of this case. For the foregoing reasons, the bail plea is dismissed.
6. The observations made hereinabove are confined only to this bail application. They are to be considered as tentative in nature by the learned trial Judge insofar as trial of the main case is concerned. The learned trial Judge will decide the main case in accordance with law, uninfluenced by whatever is observed herein above.