' Qazi Muhammad Zubair is a Forest Ranger Officer. In a report lodged vide F.I.R. No,17 dated 3-2- 1991 at P.S. Mirpur the accused was charged for effective firing on Riasat Khan complainant with a .30 bore pistol at 1-30 a.m. (night). A case under section 324 of the Cirminal Law (Amendment)
Ordinance, 1991 was consequently registered. The accused on the following day approached the Court of Session and obtained pre-arrest (interim) bail which was later on confirmed on 26-2-1991.
This order has been now impugned by P.W. Riasat Khan with a prayer to cancel the bail of the accused-respondent.
2. A perusal of the record shows that the accused has been allowed pre-arrest bail on the plea of mala fides. The accused who is a Forest Officer a month back had a dispute with the complainant and his father Mohabat Khan on the possession of illicit timber which gave rise to the registration of a criminal case under section 506/353/34, P.P.C., in the police station. It was stated that on account of the said report lodged by the accused against the petitioner and his father in the capacity of a Forest Officer he was later on involved in a made up case by the complainant.
3. The accused also pleaded in defence a case of alibi. That at relevant time on the night in question he was on duty at village Maira Rehmat Khan (lying at a distance of 3/4 hours jounrey from the present place of occurrence) where the respondent apprehended some illicit timber from one Shamarez Khan and recovered a sum of Rs,5,785 by way of fine. The official record relating to the possession of illicit timber and receipt of fine from Shamarez Khan had been produced in the lower Court with an affidavit of the said person.
4. Truly the accused is named in the report for effective firing. But in view of the attending circumstances of the case as aforesaid the learned Sessions Judge on the basis of provisional and tentative sifting of evidence, which was not prohibited, could enlarge the accused on bail on the consideration of some important material which he did not deem fit to ignore notwithstanding the fact that a direct charge against the accused had been made in the F.I.R.
5. There is no allegation that the accused has been guilty of the misuse of bail concession. He is a responsible Government servant and there are no such apprehensions that he may abscond when called for trial. Investigation in the case is almost complete and the trial is expected to commence shortly. The cancellation of bail at this stage in the circumstances would not be proper. .