MUSHIR ALAM, J.---Both Petitioners seeks cancellation of bail of Shoaib Ahmed, Respondent No.2 (in Crl. P No.201/2020), and Mst. Raheela Parveen (widow of deceased Muhammad Asif) Respondent No.2, (in Crl. P.
No.656/2020) who were extended bail by the learned trial Court. The allegation against the present accused is of carrying the main accused to the house of the deceased. It was ruled that and the High Court also took note of the fact that the accused surrendered before the learned trial Court just after his nomination in the crime, though he was not named in the FIR. The case was considered for further inquiry .
2. Learned counsel for the Petitioner , who is the father of the deceased, seeks cancellation of the bail on the ground that there is explicit implication by the other co-accused-Mst. Raheela Parveen, who happens to be the wife of one of the deceased victims, alleging her involvement with one of the accused persons. We are not committed to interfere in the concession of bail as extended by the learned High Court. Accord ingly, no case for interference is made out in the impugned judgment. The petitioners in the prosecution may seek conviction if leading evidence may be found against the respondents.
3. Nasir Ali, Petitioner in Crl. Petition No.656 of 2020, is the brother of the deceased and seeks cancellation of bail which was extended to Mst. Raheela on the ground, inter alia, that she had a relationship with the accused persons and she was in contact with them. The High Court, in its impugned judgment dated 13.2.2020, considered that she did not make any concessions in her statement recorded under section 164, Cr.P.C., but merely stated that the accused persons were interested in her and that too cannot be taken into consideration. The mere interest of the accused will not be enough to reflect her being of easy virtue. The evidence as to the recovery of cell number being possessed by her and in her use is not of much help.
4. Such tentative conclusions do call for further inquiry and if, at all, prosecution may be able to establish otherwise, the accused may be convicted. Presently , no case for interference at bail stage is made out. Both these Petitions are dismissed and leave to appeal are declined.