' MUHAMMAD ALAM KHAN, J.~ Through the instant petition I propose to dispose of applications bearing Nos.916, 917 and 918 titled Allah Khan Versus Amir Muhammad etc, Allah Khan Versus Haziqur Rehman etc. And Allah Khan Versus Aleem Khan etc., as all arise out of the same F.I.R. And involved a common question of law and fact.
2. Briefly narrated the facts of the case are that Allah Khan complainant/ petitioner lodged an F.I.R.
No, 95 in the Police Station, Takht Nasrati District Karak dated 2-6-2007 in which he has narrated the occurrence, to the effect that on 2-6-2007 at 10.45 A.M. He, alongwith his brothers Karim Nawaz, Sher Alam and one Gul Nawab son of Meena Roz, Shahid Mansoor son of Sher Alam were coming to the cattle fair of Takht Nasrati through Motor Car No,9704-C Peshawar in order to purchase some household articles in the cattle fair.' The car was being driven by Sher Alam. After purchasing the household articles, , they went to one Misal Khan a spice merchant. Sher Alam Khan and Karim.
Nawaz sat with the spice merchant and he, Shahid Mansoor and Gul Nawab stood by the motor car. In the meantime, Amir Muhammad, Haziq-ur-Rehman sons of Haji Muhammad, Asif Javed son of Amir Muhammad (absconding accused) residents of Khada Banda, Aleem Khan son of Maskin Khan resident of Bogra came therein duly armed with fire arms. Aleem Khan ordered and pointed out to Sher Alam and ordered the rest of the accused to kill him. On his command Asif Javed fired at Sher Alam Khan deceased with which he was hit and died on the spot, then and there Amir Muhammad and Haziq-ur-Rehman also fired at the complainant and eyes- witnesses but they escaped. It was averred in the F.I.R. That besides the complainant Gul Nawaz, Shahid Mansoor and Karim Nawaz had witnessed the occurrence. The motive of the occurrence was stated to be previous blood feud between the parties.
3. Aleem Khan, Amir Muhammad and Haziq-ur-Rehman moved application for bail to the Court of Mr. Asmatullah Wazir, Judicial Magistrate 1st Takht Nasrati District Karak for their post arrest bails which were declined vide orders dated 5-7-2007 and 12-6-2007. The respondents then moved the Court of Additional Sessions Judge at Takht Nasrati and the learned Court by order dated 10-7- 2007 granted bail to the accused/ respondents. Now, Allah Khan complainant has moved the above said cancellation applications requesting for the cancellation of the bail granted to the accused/respondents by the Additional Sessions Judge at Takht Nasrati, District Karak.
4. Allah Khan petitioner was heard in detail in support of the petition while the respondents were also heard in detail and they also submitted short notes in writing, which are placed on the record.
5. It was submitted by the petitioner that the accused are directly charged in the F.I.R., the occurrence has been witnessed by the eye-witnesses and the F.I.R. Had been lodged promptly in order to rule out the possibility of meditations arid deliberation, thus the accused/ respondents were not entitled to the concession of bail.
6. On the other hand, the respondents submitted that no active role has been attributed to them.
The data collected by the prosecution in the shape of statements of eye-witnesses are contradictory in material particulars, the role of the fatal shot had been attributed to the absconding accused namely Asif Javed. The learned Additional Advocate General adopted the arguments of the complainant.
7. For the grant of bail the Court has to take into consideration the tentative assessment of data available on the record because deep appreciation may prejudice the case of the parties. Suffice is to say, that respondent Aleem Khan has been charged giving him the role of 'Lalkara (command) while the other two respondents namely Haziq-ur-Rehman and Amir Muhammad had been attributed the role of ineffective firing on the complainant and eye-witnesses. So their release on bail by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Takht Nasrati District Karak was in consonance with the established principles for grant of bail, as enunciated by the superior Courts. Once a person is released on bail strong grounds has to be established for its cancellation which are lacking in the present case.
8. Lastly it was submitted by the complainant/petitioner that the accused are intimidating him after their release on bail and thus, they are misusing the concession of bail. Regarding the intimidation or misusing the concession of bail no evidence is forthcoming and if such situation arise the petitioner will be at liberty to move afresh for the cancellation of bail of the respondents under the provisions of section 497 (5) Criminal Procedure Code as laid down by the apex Court in case of Mehr Ghulam Nabi Versus Muhammad Shafiq and others reported in 1979 SCMR page-479.
9. In view of the facts and circumstances of the case narrated above, there is no force in these petitions, which are hereby dismissed.