1. ' MUNIB AIIMAD KHAN, J.--- Through this criminal miscellaneous, filed under section 497(5), Cr.P.C.
2. The applicant is seeking cancellation of bail, granted to the respondent No,1 by the learned Sessions Judge, Karachi East by order, dated 25-4-2006, to respondents Nos.2 and 3 by order, dated 13-6-2006 and to respondents Nos.4 and 5 by order, dated 17-7-2006, all accused in F.I.R.
3. No,228 of 2005 under sections 302/107, P.P.C. Of Police Station Alfalah, Karachi East.
4. ' According to learned counsel for the applicant as well as allegation recorded in the F.I.R., the deceased Muhammad Yousaf, brother of complainant had two wives and on the instigation of first wife and her brother Muhammad Yousaf and Muhammad Yamin deceased was killed by firing when on 16-11-2005, besides the above persons, one Abdul Sattar and three unidentified persons attacked the deceased. The said F.I.R. Was based on ocular evidence of the complainant as well as his brother-in-law Ismail.
5. ' Learned counsel for the applicant, who is complainant of the above F.I.R., has submitted that the names of the accused persons have clearly been mentioned while other accused have been arrested after identification and that arms have been recovered while place of incident has also been pointed out by one of the accused Shahzad.
6. ' On the other hand, Mst. Afsheen Aman, learned counsel for the State has opposed the cancellation of bail on the ground that the orders of the learned Sessions Judge in respect of all the respondents, released on bail are very lucid and factual position as well as available evidence in the shape of 161, Cr.P.C. Statement has been discussed by the learned trial Court and thereafter bail has been granted keeping in view various decisions of the superior Courts which find mention in all the three orders impugned herein.
7. After hearing the learned counsel I have also perused the orders impugned herein and found that main evidence brought forward by the complainant is his presence at the place of incident as well as of his brother-in-law Ismail but that very evidence has been controverted by Mst. Amina, the second wife of the deceased in her statement under section 161, Cr.P.C. Wherein she has stated that both of them were inside the house at the time of incident. The learned Sessions Judge has also scrutinized the memo. Of place of incident which does not point out the place where the witnesses were standing at the time of incident. The above piece of evidence available so far from the document of the prosecution itself is very material to put the case within the meaning of further inquiry. It has also been observed that the learned Sessions Judge has mentioned several rulings of the Honourable Supreme Court wherein principles for grant of bail have been enunciated wherein it has been observed that bail should not be held as punishment.
8. ' In the light of the above discussion, the criminal miscellaneous application has no force and is dismissed.