ATAUR REHMAN KHAN Versus FATEH MUHAMMAD

Three accused namely one Shahjehan and two respondents were charged for trespass and ineffective firing. All of them had applied for bail before arrest. The learned Additional Sessions Judge has confirmed the interim bail of the respondents since the documents and evidence brought on file reported that the Adda in dispute belonged to Nawabzada Muhammad Khalid Khan father of Fateh Muhammad Khan accused‑respondent No.1 and further the I.O. has opined in the case diary that the accused‑respondents were nit involved in the case. The interim bail of Shahjehan co‑accused was, however, not confirmed and 'he was taken into custody.

2. A pertinent question was put to the learned counsel for the complainant if co‑accused Shahjehan has since been releases on bail after‑arrest and his answer was in affirmative. He was further asked if the complainant has also applied for cancellation of the After arrest bail of Shahjehan co‑accused and his reply was in the negative. As such there shall arise a question whether a pre‑arrest bail granted to the accused‑respondents should in circumstances be recalled when it appears all probable rather certain that they will also be released on bail after arrest on merits since their co‑accused equally charged has been released on bail while the respondents are also having a better case on account of the documentary evidence as well the opinion of the investigation officer to proclaim them innocent. This circumstance of not moving against the grant of after arrest bail of the co‑accused A would impliedly spell out mala fides on the part of the complainant and would entitle the accused‑respondents to continue on the pre‑arrest bail as granted by the learned Additional Sessions Judge. The bail cancellation application is, therefore, dismissed.

H.B.T./709/P Bail cancellation application dismissed.