' M. BILAL KHAN, J.- Munir Ahmed and Shakeel Ahmad sons of Yousaf, the petitioners seek pre ^ arrest bail in case F.I.R. No,305/2003 dated 2-12-2003, registered with Police Station Satrah District Sialkot, for offences under sections 109, 148, 302, 337-A(i), 337-L(ii), 149, P.P.C.
2. The prosecution story need not be detailed for disposal of this bail application as it would be sufficient to state that the petitioners were undergoing trial in the aforesaid case before the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Daska.
3. On 21-6-2005, it was brought to the notice of the Court that P.Ws. In the case namely Sabir Ali, Khadam Hussain, Muhammad Sharif, Asghar Ali, Muhammad Tariq, Muhammad Asif, Muhammad Khalid and Ghulam Haider had abandoned their places , of residences from village Kot Mokhal. The statement of the process server as C.W was recorded to the said effect and the learned trial court also took into account statement made by the Lambardar of village Kot Mokhal verifying that the said witnesses had abandoned their residential abodes due to the fact that a murder case had been, registered against them at Police Station Satrah, District Sialkot.
4. Keeping in view the circumstances of the case the learned. Additional Session ^ Judge admitted both the petitioners to postarrest bail in the sum of Rs, 1,00,000 each with one surety each in the like amount to his satisfaction and adjourned the case sine die.
5. Thereafter it appears that after two years on 18-8-2007, Sabir Ali the complainant of the case made an application to the learned Additional Sessions Judge/trial court under Section 497(5), Cr.P.C., praying therein that since he and other witnesses had become available, bail granted to the petitioners may be cancelled. The learned Additional Sessions Judge vide his order dated 22- 10-2007 proceeded to accept the said application and cancelled the to the petitioners vide order dated 21-6-2005.
6. I have heard Mr. Zafar Iqbal Chohan, the learned counsel for the petitioners, Mr. Muhammad Iqbal Chaudhry, Deputy Prosecutor-General and have perused the record brought by Tanvir Hussain A.S.-I. Police Station Satrah district Sialkot.
7. I agree with the learned counsel for the petitioners that considerations for grant of bail and for cancellation of bail- once duly granted are entirely different. A perusal of the impugned order reveals that pre-requisites required for invoking Section, 497 (5), Cr.P.C., were not present in the case. The mere fact that after two long years the witnesses had become available, by itself was not sufficient enough to recall the concession of to the petitioners especially so when there was no allegation that they had ever misused the said concession. It is trite that bail once granted cannot be recalled unless there are compelling circumstances or that bail granting order is void, illegal, absurd or fanciful. As already stated elsewhere none of the aforesaid conditions were available to recall the bail order.
8. The learned Deputy Prosecutor- General for State has opposed this petition for grant of pre- arrest bail, however, he could not point out any absurdity in the original bail granting order dated 21-6-2005, which could . Warrant interference by the learned Additional Sessions Judge.
9. In this view of the matter ad interim pre-arrest to the petitioners vide order dated 5-11-2007 is hereby confirmed. They will keep on appearing before the learned trial court regularly. In case they absent themselves, the learned trial court shall be at liberty to take action strictly in accordance with law undeterred by this order. Disposed of.