2017 PLP 2514 (YLR)

ABDUL SAMI KHAN, J.-- Through this petition under section 497(5), Cr .P.O. the petitioner has sought cancellation of bail allowed to respondent No.1 by the learned trial court in case FIR No.693/14 dated 20.08.2014, under sections 302, 34, P.P.C., Police Station Mansoorabad, District Faisalabad vide order dated 21.09.2015.

2. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the record with their able assistance. It has been noticed by this Court that although respondent No.1 is named in FIR, yet the fact remains that the role assigned to him therein could not be established during the course of investigation and he was merely found present at the spot at the time of occurrence but did not cause any injury to the deceased. Admittedly the petitioner/complainant has never challenged the outcome of investigation in respect of respondent No.1 either by moving application for the change of investigation or by filing private complaint, which prima facie shows his satisfaction about the outcome of investigation. Furthermore in view of the allegations contained in FIR and the facts emerged during the course of investigation, prima facie the case of the petitioner against respondent No. 1 has become a case of two versions i.e. one put forward by the petitioner in FIR and the other came on record during investigation and which version is correct shall be determined by the learned trial court after recording evidence. Reliance can easily be placed upon "Ehsan Ullah v. The State"(2012 SCMR 1137) and "Zaigham Ashraf v. State and others" 2016 SCMR,

18. It is also admitted position of the case that challan has already been submitted before the learned trial court and the trial against respondent No.1 has commenced, so at this stage it would not be in the fitness of things to recall the concession of post-arrest bail granted to respondent No.1 by the learned trial court after considering merits of the case. Even otherwise it is trite that the grounds for grant of bail and those for its cancellation are entirely different. For cancellation of bail very strong, exceptional and cogent reasons regarding misusing, abusing, hampering with the prosecution evidence and repeating the same offence are required. Reliance is placed on the cases of Faisal Waheed v. The State (1999 PCr.LJ 882), Ehsan Akbar v. The State and 2 others (2007 SCMR 482), Mst. Noor Habib v. Saleem Raza and others (2009 SCMR 786) and Muhammad Azhar v. Dilawar and another (2009 SCMR 1202). Till today there is no allegation of misusing or abusing of the concession of bail against respondent No.1 and learned counsel for the petitioner has also not addressed any argument before this Court today in this regard so as to make basis for cancellation of bail.

3. For what has been discussed above, I have not seen any force in this petition to warrant an interference into the discretion exercised by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Faisalabad vide order dated 21.09.2015, hence, this petition is hereby dismissed. WA/M-219/L Petition dismissed.