2007 P Cr (PLP)

TARIQ SHAMIM, J.

Through this petition the petitioner seeks cancellation of bail granted by the learned lower Court to the respondents' vide order dated 27-6-2006 in case F.I.R. No.618 dated 14-6-2006 for offences under sections 420, 468, 471, P.P.C. registered at Police Station North Cantt., Lahore.

2. Brief facts of the case are that the respondents in connivance with the Patwari Halqa deprived the complainant of his land measuring 9 Kanals, 7 Marlas bearing Khasra Nos.2111, 2112 by showing a bogus exchange of property.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the learned lower Court extended the extraordinary concession of pre-arrest bail to the respondents which could only be granted to innocent persons and by no stretch of imagination could the respondents be considered as innocent in the case; that sufficient incriminating material was available on the record which was overlooked by the learned Court; that no civil litigation was pending between the parties at the time of grant of bail by the learned Court and that the case of the petitioner was not one of further enquiry, hence the impugned order was liable to be recalled.

4. Conversely, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents contended that the investigation in the case was conducted at the local level in which the respondents were declared innocent. The D.S.P. as well as S.P. Investigation concurred with the opinion of the Investigating Officer and cancellation report was prepared on 7-9-2006. On the application of the complainant the matter went up to the S.S.P. Investigation who also declared the respondents innocent and held that the case against the respondents was of no evidence. Civil litigation was pending between the parties at that time. Further, the petitioner has not been able to point out any illegality or arbitrariness in the impugned orders, hence the bail granting order did not call for interference.

5. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

6. It is an admitted fact that the respondents have been declared innocent in successive investigations by the police and report for cancellation of F.I.R. was also prepared on 7-9-2006. The matter was investigated right up to the level of S.S.P. on the applications filed by the complainant who opined that the case against the respondents was false and fabricated. The learned trial Court while exercising jurisdiction under sections 497, 498, Cr.P.C. was fully justified in extending the extraordinary concession of bail to the respondents particularly as mala fide of the complainant had been established and nothing had to be recovered from the possession of the respondents.

7. Even otherwise the consideration for grant of bail and cancellation of bail are different and strong exceptional grounds would be required for cancelling the bail once it has been validly granted by the learned lower Court. The provisions of section 497, subsection (5), Cr.P.C. are not punitive in nature and there is no compulsion for cancelling the bail, unless the bail granting order is patently illegal, erroneous, factually incorrect and has resulted in miscarriage of justice or where the respondents are found to be making efforts to misuse the concession of bail by extending threats or tampering with the prosecution case.

7. In the instant case the learned counsel for the petitioner has not been able to point out any such illegality or infirmity referred to above in the impugned order.

8. In view of the above discussion this petition being without merit is dismissed. H.B.T./M-574/L Petition dismissed.