ORDER   SHEET

IN  THE  HIGH  COURT  OF SINDH, CIRCUIT  COURT,  LARKANA

Crl.Misc.Appln.No.S-87 of 2021.

_______________________________________________________________________

DATE                                       ORDER WITH SIGNATURE OF HON’BLE JUDGE

_______________________________________________________________________

For hearing of main case.

31.01.2022

                        Mr. Abid Hussain Qadri, Advocate for the applicant.

                        Mr. Shahbaz Ali Brohi, Advocate for private respondent.

                        Mr. Abdul Ghaffar Kalhoro, A.P.G for the State.

                        =  *  = * = * = * = * =

IRSHAD ALI SHAH - J;- The facts in brief necessary for disposal of the instant Crl.Misc.Application are that the private respondent on being involved in a murder case, on refusal of pre-arrest bail by learned trial Court was admitted to pre-arrest bail by this Court, same, the applicant has sought to be recalled and cancelled by making the instant application u/s. 497(5) Cr.PC.

                        It is contended by the applicant that the private respondent has misused the concession of pre-arrest bail by issuing threats of murder to the applicant, therefore, he is not entitled to enjoy the concession of bail; therefore, same to be recalled and cancelled.

                        Learned A.P.G for the State and learned counsel for the private respondent have sought for dismissal of the instant Crl.Misc.Application by contending that the bail granted to the private respondent on merit could not be cancelled on the basis of false and flimsy grounds particularly when it is not challenged before Honourable Apex Court.

                        I have considered the above arguments and perused the record.

                        The private respondent was admitted to pre-arrest bail somewhat two years back; since then he is attending the learned trial Court without effective progress in trial. In that situation, recalling the concession of pre-arrest bail to the private respondent which was granted to him on merits by this Court, under the pretext that he now is extending threats of murder to the applicant would be unjustified and un-called for.

                        In case of Meeran Bux Vs.The State and another                            (PLD 1989 SC-347), it has been held by the Honourable Apex Court that;

“Since the appellant remained on bail for more than one year before the bail was cancelled by the High Court without abusing the concession of bail in any manner and the reason given by the learned Session Judge for granting pre‑arrest bail that the injury was on non‑vital part of the body of 'the deceased i.e. thigh and was simple, was not without foundation, we would, therefore, in the circumstances, set aside the impugned order of the High Court and restore the order of the Sessions Judge granting the pre‑arrest bail.”

                        In view of above, the instant Crl.Misc.Application fails and is dismissed accordingly. 

      JUDGE