S.A. NUSRAT, J.-- The petitioner /complainant has applied for cancellation of bail granted to the respondent Arshad Javid by the learned High Court.
2.In admitting the respondent to bail, learned High Court has noticed as under; "Ilyas and Arif P.Ws. Claimed to have seen a person lying injured near the cluster of trees and 3 armed persons going away soon after hearing the fire report but they kept mum for more than 4 months and disclosed these facts to the Investigating Officer for the first time on 14-8-1985."
3. It was contended by the learned counsel that no case for further inquiry was made out and in the circumstances the discretion was not correctly exercised by the learned High Court under subsection 2 of section 497, Cr.P.C. The contention must fail because nowhere it is mentioned that bail was granted as the case was of further inquiry. Certain rulings cited by the learned counsel, which related to the application for section 497(2), Cr.P.C. Are, therefore, irrelevant. The discretion in the case having been rightly exercised, no interference is called for. The petition is accordingly dismissed.