2006 SCMR 93 (PLP)

JAVED IQBAL, J.

This criminal petition for leave to appeal is directed against the judgment, dated 24-8-2005 passed by learned High Court of Balochistan, Quetta, whereby the bail granted in favour of petitioner has been cancelled.

2. Precisely stated the facts of the case are that the petitioner was apprehended in a case got registered under sections 3, 4 and 5 of the Explosive Substances Act; 1908 read with section 7(m) of the Anti-Terrorism Act, 1997 vide F.I.R. No.38 of 2005 at Police Station Turbat Kech on the report of. Muhammad Qasim, S.-I./S.H.O. wherein it was alleged that pursuant to an explosion near the office of Project Director, Meerani Dam a dead body of some unknown person was recovered who succumbed to the injuries on account of the said explosion. It is further alleged that the blood trail was followed which culminated into the arrest of the petitioner who was found lying behind the bushes without having shirt on his person in an injured condition and was arrested. It is further mentioned that during the course of investigation the petitioner made disclosure about the identity and name of the main culprit. The learned Sessions Judge, Mekran at Turbat, extended the concession of bail in favour of petitioner on 18-6-2005 which was cancelled by means of judgment impugned, hence this petition.

3. Heard Mr. Kamran Murtaza, learned Advocate Supreme Court on behalf of petitioner and Mr. Ameenuddin Bazai, learned Advocate-General for State at length, scanned the entire record with the eminent assistance of learned Advocate Supreme Court and perused the order, dated 18-6-2005 passed by learned Sessions Judge, Mekran at Turbat as well as judgment impugned. The prime contention of Mr. Kamran Murtaza, learned Advocate Supreme Court who entered appearance on behalf of petitioner is that sufficient incriminating material connecting the petitioner with the commission of alleged offence is lacking and hence there was no justification whatsoever available for the learned High Court for cancellation of bail of the petitioner granted by the learned Sessions Judge after having scrutinized the entire evidence with care and caution. The learned Additional Advocate-General has controverted strenuously the view point as canvassed at bar by Mr. Kamran Murtaza, learned Advocate Supreme Court on behalf of petitioner and supported the judgment impugned for the reasons enumerated therein with further submission that the petitioner was caught red-handed in an injured condition soon after the blast from the bushes where he took shelter and at his pointation the name of real culprit who sustained serious injuries while making the explosion and expired instantaneously was revealed.

4. The evidence collected so far by the prosecution is demonstrative of the fact that sufficient incriminating material is available connecting the petitioner with the commission of alleged offence and prima facie a case is made out against him. It is worth-mentioning that he was arrested immediately after the blast lying in a injured condition without having shirt on his person which was burnt as a result of blast and taken into custody by the police. In this regard the A statements of Muhammad Qasim S.-I./S.H.O., Nasibullah, S.-I., and Murad Bukhsh, S.-I. cannot be discarded. It also transpired from the scrutiny of record that the Shalwar which was subsequently taken into possession was also burnt and blood-stained due to the explosion which depicts prima facie the involvement of the petitioner in the alleged offence. The observations made herein above are tentative in nature and shall 'not affect the merits of the case. The learned High Court has not exercised its discretion in an arbitrary manner while cancelling the bail granted in favour of petitioner. It is well-settled by now that where a prima facie case is made out the Supreme Court would not interfere with A the order cancelling the bail. In this regard we are fortified by the dictum as laid down in case of Karam Elahi v. State 1977 SCMR 499(2) and Muhammad Ashraf v. State 1979 SCMR

399. The judgment impugned being unexceptionable and well-based hardly needs any interference. The petition being devoid of merit is dismissed and leave refused. The order, dated 18-6-2005 whereby ad interim bail was granted to the petitioner is hereby withdrawn. M.B.A./F-42/S??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? ??????????????????????? Leave refused.