Through this petition under Section 497(5), Cr.P.C. The petitioner has sought cancellation bail allowed to Respondent No, 2 by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Kasur vide order dated 17.09.2014 in case FIR No, 120/14, dated 07.04.2014 for the offence under Sections 376, 379, 392, 411, PPC, registered at Police Station Khudian, District Kasur.
2. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner at some length and have gone through the record as well as the impugned bail granting order of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Kasur dated 17.09.2014 with great care and caution. It has been noticed by this Court that. Respondent No, 2 is not named in FIR and his name has been introduced in this case through supplementary statement got recorded by the complainant after the delay of eight days from registration of FIR, which has not been explained by the complainant, which prima facie shows that respondent No, 2 has been implicated in this case after due deliberation and consultation. After submission of challan before the learned trial Court, charge against Respondent No, 12 has been framed and the case is fixed for prosecution evidence and at this stage, it would not be appropriate to recall the concession of post arrest bail, granted by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, while considering the merits of the case. Even otherwise, it is settled law that the grounds for grant of bail and those for its cancellation are entirely different For cancellation of bail very strong, exceptional and cogent reasons regarding misusing, abusing, hampering with the prosecution evidence and repeating the same offence are required which grounds are missing in this case. Reliance is placed on the cases of Faisal Waheed v. The State (1999 P.Cr.LJ. 882), Ehsan Akbar v. The State and 2 others (2007 SCM R 482), Mst. Noor Habib v. Saleem Rasa and others (2009 SCM R 786) and Muhammad Azhar v.
Dilawar and VI another (2009 SCM R 1202). Neither any allegation of misusing or abusing of the concession of bail has been levelled by the petitioner against Respondent No, 2 nor any argument has been addressed before this Court today in this regard so as to make basis for cancellation of bail.
3. For what has been discussed above I have not seen an force in this petition which is hereby dismissed..
4. The observations made above are tentative in nature and are strictly confined to the decision of this bail petition only.
(A.S) .