' The applicant Rashid Mehmood seeks bail on statutory grounds in a case under sections 367, 342, 504, 109, 34, 324 and 337, P.P.C. (F.I.R. No,21 of 1998 Police Station City Court) pending trial before the Court of learned IIIrd Additional Sessions Judge, Karachi South.
2. The applicant's previous Bail Application No,1189 of 1999 on merits of the case was dismissed by this Court on 17-5-2000.
3. Prosecution case briefly stated is that the complainant is a practising Senior Advocate of High Court of Sindh. Previously he used to reside in Nazimabad Karachi but since a year he shifted alongwith his family to a flat in Shan Plaza, North Karachi. His son Muhammad Adil aged 23 years usually goes alongwith the complainant to City Courts to render assistance to the complainant. On 6-5-1996 while they were at City Courts, from there the complainant went to attend to the High Court. The applicant and his brothers (the co-accused) came in the meanwhile, in a vehicle and abducted the complainant's son Muhammad Adil. On his return, the complainant finding his son missing contacted various posts and places including Chief Minister's Complaint Cell on phone No,134 and Rangers Posts. He, however, lodged a report on the same day, which was recorded as Non-cog Report at City' Court Police Station. The complainant, however, on 7-5-1996 at 2-25 a.m received a telephone message from his residence at the residence of Mr. Khudai, Advocate in PECH Society that Muhammad Adil had been dropped secretly and silently at his home. Accordingly the complainant and his companion Advocates reached the complainant's residence and found Muhammad Adil in serious condition. Muhammad Adil was removed to Civil Hospital. Information was also given to Police Station concerned but the Medico-Legal Officer informed the S.I., Police that the injured was not able to give statement. The injured-abductee was, however, removed from Civil Hospital to Jinnah Hospital Post Graduate Medical Center and then to Liaquat National Hospital for proper medical treatment. The injured regained his consciousness on 10-5-1996 at 3- 00 p.m. When his statement was recorded by Police, wherein he disclosed that he was abducted by the applicant and his brothers in a Van, was later made senseless and maltreated and ultimately left at his home surreptitiously. The motive Of offence is shown to be enmity between the complainant party and Muhammad Younus (father of the applicant) contractor/owner of Shan Builders over poor condition of the flat allotted to them and subsequent complaints of the complainant party to Karachi Building Control Authority and other Government functionaries.
4. The present bail application has been moved on the ground of statutory delay in conclusion of the trial of the applicant, the same having been rejected by the trial Court vide its order, dated 13- 4-2001.
5. It is contended by Mr. Syed Sarfraz Ahmed, learned counsel for the applicant Rashid Mehmood that the applicant was arrested on 11-10-1999 and has remained in continuous custody for a period of 1-1/2 years, The offence is not punishable with death and that no delay in conclusion of the trial has been caused by or on behalf of the applicant. Learned counsel has further urged that the applicant's case is not hit by Fourth Proviso to subsection (1) of section 497, Cr.P.C. Reliance has been placed upon:-- ' 1997 SCMR 361.
' 1984 SCMR 613. 1987 PCr.LJ 1754.
6. On the other hand Mr. Habib Ahmed learned A.A.-G. Assisted by Mr. Muhammad Iqbal Aqil, Advocate/complainant has opposed the grant of bail tooth and nail by contending that the delay in conclusion of the trial has been occasioned by the applicant and secondly the applicant's case is hit by Fourth Proviso. It was urged that the act of applicant and his brothers (co-accused) is an act of terrorism. It was submitted that the F.I.R. Was lodged on 10-5-1996, whereas the applicant was arrested on 11-10-1999. The co-accused Jahangir absconded after grant of interim pre-arrest bail by the learned trial Court. The applicant after having been allowed interim pre-arrest bail by 1st. Additional Sessions Judge also absconded, as a result of which his bail application was cancelled. But was later remanded by the learned Sessions Judge before whom the applicant.Appeared for grant of pre-arrest bail. Thus, learned A.A.-G. Has summed up that the applicant' like his brother co-accused is likely to abscond and his act is an act of terrorism.
' Reliance was placed upon:-
(1) PLD 1990 SC 934.
(2) 1997 SCMR 885.
7. The allegations against the applicant and his co-accused are that they came to the City Courts Compound in a vehicle and took away Muhammad Adil (P.W) in the morning time during Court hours, knowing that Muhammad Adil would he present in the Court premises. The prosecution case is that the complainant is practising Senior Advocate of High Court of Sindh and his son Muhammad Adil aged 23 years usually goes alongwith his father to City Court to render assistance to him. Muhammad Adil was abducted from Court premises. Abduction of any person or his removal perforce from premises of a Court of law, in my humble view, is an act involving terrorism.
Law Courts are sanctuaries. Such premises must be made known as sanctuaries. It must not be forgotten that even an offender cannot be arrested there or taken away from there. The case of the applicant falls within the ambit of Fourth Proviso and is not found fit for bail. The Criminal Bail Application No,532 of 2001 is therefore, dismissed.
8. The above bail application was dismissed by a short order, dated 18-5-2001. Above are the reasons for the same.