1. ' Applicant Noor Ahmed alias Noor Jehan son of Chakar Khan Magsi, has approached this Court for releasing him on bail in the case registered against him through F.I.R. No,29 of 1989 at Police Station Garhi Khairo, District Jaccobabad for the offence under sections 307, 353, 411, 427, 148, 149, P.P.C. And 13-D, Arms Ordinance.
2. ' The story of the prosecution case in short was that S.H.O. Of Police Station Garhi Khairo, in company of about 20-25 other police personnel under the command of two D.S.Ps. Had an encounter with criminals who were seen running away in a car. The car was chased by the police which was abandoned by the alleged criminals at a distance of 2 Kms. And they were thereafter supported by other criminals at that spot which included the present applicant who alongwith other culprits had emerged from a nearby village and had a detailed encounter with police. After a long encounter some of the assailants were captured while other ran away including the present applicant. The applicant was identified by some of the members of the police party. He was ultimately arrested and challaned in the present case. At present the case against the applicant is pending in the Court of Sessions Judge/Special Judge (S.T.A.) Jacobabad.
3. ' The contention of the applicant is that he was arrested on 2-7-1989 and since then he is continuously in jail while his trial in the present case has not concluded. On the ground of statutory delay the applicant had approached the trial Court for grant of bail but his request was turned down on 11-8-1998 and the trial Court had observed while rejecting the request of bail of the applicant as under:-- ' "Accused Noor Ahmed alias Noor Jehan is committing crimes in Sindh and Balouchistan from Karachi to Usta Muhammad. He is involved in serious cases and is a convicted prisoner. His trial inside the jail is ordered by the Government and he is undergoing sentence. His case is not covered for the grant of bail by 111rd proviso to section 497(1), Cr.P.C."
4. ' The learned counsel for the applicant while arguing this application mainly contended that since applicant has remained in jail for nearly 8 years his case was covered by IIIrd proviso to section.497(1) and that, therefore, he was entitled to be released on hail as the delay in the disposal of the case was not attributed to the applicant.
5. ' No doubt, applicant has remained in jail for sufficiently long time and his trial has not concluded but the right under IIIrd proviso to section 497(1), Cr.P.C. Is controlled by IVth proviso of the same section. Consequently, in order to find out the applicability of the said proviso the case is to be examined from that angle. There is a report from Superintendent, Central Prison, Sukkur on record which shows that the applicant is required in cases of Hyderabad carnage. At the same time the applicant is wanted in case under sections 302, 307, 326 and 354, P.P.C. Of Police Station "B" Area, Jhal Magsi, pending in the Court of Additional Sessions Judge Usta Muhammad Balochistan. The applicant is also required in three other cases of Jacobabad and Karachi. The applicant is also a previous convict, initially having been convicted to undergo imprisonment for life in a narcotics case but in appeal Federal Shariat Court reduced his sentence to 15 years. Learned counsel for the applicant insisted that since the applicant has completed his sentence in the above described case and that he has been granted bail in the other cases he deserves to be released on bail.
6. ' We find from the record that earlier the applicant had approached this Court in Criminal Bail Application No,1786 of 1996 and his application was rejected on 17-2-1997 by another D.B. Of this Court comprising my learned brother Justice Kamal Mansoor Alam, the Chief Justice and Mr. Justice Zakir Hussain Mirza (as he then was), and the earlier order is reproduced:-- ' "The only ground on which the bail is sought is that of statutory delay in the trial. However, a report from jail shows that the applicant has been convicted for life imprisonment in one case and is involved in about 76 other cases as shown in the jail roll. Counsel for the applicant states that the present bail application was filed prior to the conviction of the applicant. He submits that he would be satisfied if while disposing of this bail application, permission is granted to the applicant to repeat bail application on the setting aside of the aforesaid conviction.
7. ' We accordingly dismiss this bail application with the observation that if and when the conviction of the applicant is set aside in the .Aforesaid case, he may repeat bail application.
8. (Sd.) Kamal Mansoor Alam, Judge. (Sd.) Zakir Hussain Mizra, Judge.
9. It is not denied that the applicant is a previous convict in an offence which was punishable with life imprisonment, we, therefore, find that the case of the applicant is covered by IVth Proviso to section 497(1) Cr.P.C. As he is a previous convict in an offence for which the punishment prescribed was life imprisonment.
10. In addition to that, from the jail report and other record and the observations of the trial Court we have no hesitation to hold that applicant is involved in acts of terrorism and that he is a desperate and dangerous criminal. Under these circumstances, although trial against the applicant is delayed for a sufficiently long time we are not in favour of granting him bail and the possibility that after coming out, he will repeat the commission of crimes, cannot be ruled out. We had rejected the request for bail of the applicant on 10-9-1998 by a short order and these are the detailed reasons for the same. revisions by the competent authorities. Therefore, it is advisable to consult the official sources or legal professionals for the most up-to-date and accurate information.