Muhammad Alamgir V. Baha-Ud-Din and another,
Bench: Abdul Hameed Baloch
📝 AI Summary — Plain-Language Overview
This case is about an attempt to cancel bail that had already been granted to an accused person in a serious criminal case.
The background: an FIR was registered against the accused under sections dealing with dacoity (armed robbery) and abetment, alleging that he and his companions had forced the complainant's uncle out of a dumper truck at gunpoint, tied him up, and stole the vehicle. After his arrest and completion of investigation, the accused applied for bail, which was granted by an Additional Sessions Judge. The complainant was unhappy with this decision and approached the Balochistan High Court asking that the bail order be declared illegal and cancelled, and that the accused be re-arrested.
The High Court dismissed the complainant's request. It explained that once bail has been granted by a court with proper authority, it cannot simply be cancelled later unless there are strong, exceptional reasons to do so. Cancelling bail is legally different from deciding whether to grant it in the first place. The court noted that the complainant had not shown that the accused misused his bail in any way after being released, such as tampering with evidence, threatening witnesses, or fleeing. Simply disagreeing with the earlier decision, or presenting an alternative view of the evidence, was not enough to justify cancellation.
This case matters because it reinforces an important principle in Pakistani criminal law: bail once granted is protected from casual reversal, ensuring stability and fairness in the justice process, unless genuine misuse of that liberty is demonstrated.
یہ مقدمہ ایک ایسے ملزم کی پہلے سے منظور شدہ ضمانت کو منسوخ کروانے کی کوشش سے متعلق ہے جس پر ایک سنگین فوجداری مقدمے میں مقدمہ درج تھا۔
پس منظر کچھ یوں ہے کہ ملزم کے خلاف ڈکیتی اور معاونت سے متعلق دفعات کے تحت ایف آئی آر درج کی گئی تھی، جس میں الزام لگایا گیا تھا کہ ملزم اور اس کے ساتھیوں نے مدعی کے چچا کو اسلحے کے زور پر ڈمپر ٹرک سے باہر نکالا، انہیں باندھا، اور گاڑی چھین لی۔ گرفتاری اور تفتیش مکمل ہونے کے بعد ملزم نے ضمانت کی درخواست دی، جو ایڈیشنل سیشن جج نے منظور کر لی۔ مدعی اس فیصلے سے مطمئن نہیں تھا اور اس نے بلوچستان ہائی کورٹ سے رجوع کیا، یہ استدعا کرتے ہوئے کہ ضمانت کا حکم غیر قانونی قرار دے کر منسوخ کیا جائے اور ملزم کو دوبارہ گرفتار کیا جائے۔
ہائی کورٹ نے مدعی کی درخواست مسترد کر دی۔ عدالت نے واضح کیا کہ جب ایک بار کوئی عدالت، جسے مناسب اختیار حاصل ہو، ضمانت منظور کر دے تو اسے بعد میں
Generated from the full judgment text below — not a substitute for reading the actual opinion.
2020 Y L R 1451 [Balocshitan] Before Abdul Hameed Baloch, J MUHAMMAD ALAMGIR---Applicant Versus BAHAUDDIN and another ---Respondents Criminal Bail Cancellation Application No. 448 of 2019, decided on 7th November, 2019. Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) --- ----S. 497(5) ---Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss. 395 & 109---Dacoity and abetment ---Petition for cancellation of bail --- Scope --- Petitioner sought cancellation of bail granted to accused who along with his companions was alleged to have alighted the uncle of complainant from vehicle and took it away---Held; bail granted by court of competent jurisdiction could not be recalled/cancelled until and unless exceptional grounds were established ---Petitioner had failed to point out that after release on bai l, the accused had misused the concession of bail --- Petition for cancellation of bail was dismissed. Muhammad Azhar v. Dilawar 2009 SCMR 1202 and Nasir Khan v. Waseel Gul 2011 SCMR 710 rel. Yasir Hayat for Applicant. Akhian Gul Kakar for Respondent No.1. Abdul Karim Malghani, State Counsel. Date of hearing: 4th November, 2019. ORDER ABDUL HAMEED BALOCH, J .---The applicant/complainant filed an application under section 497(5) Criminal Procedure Code for cancellation of bail of private respondent with the prayer: "In view of the above it is, therefore, accordingly prayed that this Hon'ble Court may graciously be pleased to declare the impugned bail granting order dated 3.8.2019 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Kuchlak as illegal, unlawful, hence set it aside/ cancel it accordingly, and in the consequences thereof the accused/ respondent No. 01 be taken into arrest, in the interest of equity, fair play and justice."
2. The complainant registered FIR No. 50 of 2019, under sections 395, 109 Pak istan Penal Code (P.P.C.) with Police Station Kuchlak, on 1st July 2019, with the allegations that the accused along with his companions duly armed with weapons alighted the uncle of the complainant from dumper vehicle No. TUC 143; tied him and forcibly took away the dumper vehicle. On this report the accused/ respondent No. 1 was arrested and after completion of investigation shifted to judicial custody.
3. After judicial remand the accused/respondent No. 1 moved application for his release on bail before Additional Sessions Judge, Kuchlak, who after hearing arguments allowed the same vide order dated 3rd August 2019, hence the complainant being aggrieved of the same filed instant application for cancellation of bail.
4. Heard the learned counsel for the parties as well as State Counsel and also gone through the available record. It is well entrenched by law that when bail has been granted by a court of competent jurisdiction the same cannot be recalled/ cancelled until and unless exceptional grounds are e stablished. The learned counsel for the applicant failed to point out that after release on bail the accused/ respondent has misused the concession of bail. Reliance is placed on case law Muhammad Azhar v. Dilawar 2009 SCMR 1202. The August Court has laid down the law to the following affairs: 6. It needs no reiteration that considerations for the grant of bail are quite distinct from the consideration for cancellation of bail. Once bail has been granted by a competent Court of law strong and exceptional g rounds are required for cancelling the same, as held by this Court on a number of occasions….."
5. The mere fact that two opinions, one positive on basis of tentative assessment of evidence would not be sufficient for cancellation of bail. Reliance is plac ed on Nasir Khan v. Waseel Gul 2011 SCMR 710. "----and held that main consideration for grant of bail under subsection (2) of section 497, Cr.P.C. is that if the Court on the basis of tentative assessment of evidence, form an opinion that prima facie ther e were reasonable grounds to believe that the accused has not committed an offence with which he was being charged he would be allowed bail by virtue of subsection (2) of section 497, Cr.P.C. as of right." In view of the above, I find no merit in the appl ication which is hereby dismissed. These are the reasons of short order made on 4th November, 2019. SA/154/Bal. Petition dismissed.