' SHEIKH, HAKIM ALI, J.---Through this Criminal Petition for leave to appeal, order dated 27.5.2008, passed by the learned Lahore High Court, Lahore, in Criminal Misc. No, 8888/CB/2008 (Muhammad Amin v. Muhammad Ashraf etc.) wherein the to Muhammad Ashraf by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Ferozewala, through order dated 24.7.2007, in case FIR No, 273/06, .Registered with Police Station Narang, Tehsil Muridke, District Sheikhupura, under sections 302/147/148/452/109/337-A(i), 337-F(v)/337- L(ii), PPC was cancelled by the learned High Court.
Hence, this petition seeking bail in the above-mentioned case, after reversal of the impugned order dated 27.5.2008, above-mentioned.
2. In the above-noted FIR, a specific role attracted to the petitioner in the occurrence, on the basis of which his bail was cancelled by the learned High Court, was that of the petitioner having inflicted SOTA blow to Muhammad Sharif s/o Mehtab, due to which aforesaid. Muhammad Sharif had expired instantaneously at the spot,
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that learned Additional Sessions Judge had granted bail after arrest to the petitioner, which concession, once granted to the petitioner, could not be snatched away by 'the learned High Court, as the petitioner had not committed any misuse of bail concession granted to him. Further submits that the consideration for cancellation of bail after arrest granted are somewhat different than the grant of bail. There were no sufficient grounds or reasons to cancel the bail of the petitioner. It has also been argued by the learned counsel that there was a cross version from the petitioner/accused side, which version was to some extent found correct by the police. Three accused from the complainant party were sent up to face the trial before the learned Additional Sessions Judge. Therefore, it was a case of further inquiry and learned Additional Sessions Judge had correctly granted bail to the petitioner.
4. The other side contended that specific role was attributed to the petitioner in the murder case, which act' was supported through medical report of the doctor also The grant of bail by the learned Additional Sessions Judge had proceeded on illegal grounds: When the exercise of discretion was not properly and correctly performed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, in such case, the learned High Court was legally justified to set aside the .Bail granting order of the learned Additional Sessions Judge. .
5. After considering the above arguments of the learned counsel for the parties, we have found that no doubt the learned Additional Sessions Judge has power to grant bail in appropriate' case under section 497 of Cr.P.C. Yet that discretion can be conned/scrutinized by the learned High Court. When exercise of discretion in granting bail has been made by the sub ordinate Court on flimsy grounds and contrary to the settled principles of law. In such case, the power and jurisdiction of the High Court cannot he circumscribed and considered to be a limited one. In the instant case, a particular role with specific attribution of the act of inflicting blow to the deceased by the petitioner was ascribed in the FIR, due to which deceased had allegedly expired, which FIR was promptly lodged and a corroborative and supportive evidence in the form of post-mortem report was also in existence, in such circumstances, the discretion by the learned Additional Sessions Judge could not be considered to have been properly exercised. Even in the cross-version, which was got recorded after three months of the occurrence, there was no mention of above-noted occurrence of the murder of Muhammad Sharif deceased.##TE# Therefore, in these circumstances, the impugned order' of the learned Lahore High Court, Lahore, is not liable to be interfered with.
6. Accordingly, we dismiss this petition, refuse grant of leave for appeal. Consequently, interim order of pre-arrest bail dated 6.6.2008 passed by this Court is recalled. Interim Pre-Arrest Bail Recalled.