NIAZ ALI Versus Syed HUSSAIN SHAH

ORDER

MALIK HAQ NAWAZ, C.J .---The instant bail cancellation petition under section 497(5), Cr.P.C. has been filed by the present petitioner wherein he has made impugned the judgment/order dated 11-11-2019 of the learned District and Sessions Judge Skardu whereby the D&SJ Skardu has allowed the bail facility to the accused/respondent No.1 who was charged under sections 368, 365-B, P.P.C. vide FIR No. 17/2019 registered at Police Station Airport Skardu.

2. As per the learned counsel for the petitioner the accused/respondent No.1 is directly involved in the offence and has been directly nominated in the promptly lodged FIR No. 17/2019. He further asserted that there is material and circumstantial evidence available against the accused/respondent No. 1 which entirely supports the prosecution case, but the learned D&SJ Skardu by overlooking the circumstantial evidence has bitterly failed to appreciate the law regarding grant of bail in non-bail offences and misinterpreted the provision of section 497, Cr.P.C. while granting bail to the accused/respondent No.1 and passed the impugned order in a hasty manner which is legally not sustainable and liable to be set aside.

3. In the light of above submissions the learned counsel for the petitioner prays that this Hon'ble Court may set aside the impugned order dated 11-11-2019 passed by the learned D&SJ Skardu in Cr. Misc No. 100/2019 and accused/respondent No.1 may be committed to judicial lockup in the larger interest of justice.

4. On the other hand the learned counsel for the respondent Mr. Yasin Baltistani, Advocate contended that the accused/respondent No.1 is an innocent citizen and allegations leveled against him are false and fabricated. He further contended that the FIR was lodged with delay by ten days and the sections 365-B and 368, P.P.C. are not attracting in the case in hand and the case is not the fit for cancellation of bail as the victim has not deposed against the present accused/respondent No.1 in her statement recorded under section 164, Cr.P.C.

5. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties at length and also gone through the record of the case with their able assistance.

6. The victim lady has been recovered and one Ghulam Rasool, who is the principal accused has been arrested from Azad Kashmir from whose possession the abducted lady has been recovered by the police. The alleged abducted lady in her statement under section 164, Cr.P.C. has exonerated the present accused/respondent No.1. The present accused/respondent No.1 was rightly allowed the facility of bail by the learned trial Court, which is maintained and cancellation of the same is hereby declined.

7 The instant bail cancellation petition is disposed of as dismissed which is ordered accordingly. File.

SA/113/GB Petition dismissed.