S.M.ZUBAIR, J.- Haji sulman, respondent No.1 herein who is involved in a case under section 302/34 PPC arising out of F.I.R. No.8, dated 12-1-1993, registered at P.S. Sillanwali, was granted bail after arrest by the learned Sessions Judge, Sargodha, vide his order dated 28-7-1993, on the ground of long detention of the respondent in jail.
Through the under consideration petition under section 497(5) Cr.P.C., the petitioner seeks the cancellation of the bail of the respondent.
2. As per F.I.R., the allegation against the respondent is that he held the deceased in his clasp, whereas his son Musharraf Iqbal gave hammer blows on his head.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the respondent was granted bail by the learned Sessions Judge solely on the ground of delay as is apparent from para. 4 of the order and this order is not tenable in the eye of law.
4. Learned counsel for the State has supported this application.
5. Learned counsel for the respondent has resisted and opposed this petition on the ground that only allegation against the respondent is that he facilitated the commission of crime and there is no allegation against him that he actually caused any injury to the deceased; hence the case against him is one of further inquiry and this was actually the intention of the learned Judge, while releasing the respondent on bail, though he has not mentioned this fact clearly in his order.
6. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have perused the record. Admittedly, the tenor of the impugned order as contained in paragraph 4 ibid shows that the learned Judge granted bail to the respondent on the statutory ground, without adverting to the relevant provision of law, which has not yet expired. The impugned order is thus fanciful, unreasonable and contrary to law; hence liable to be set aside. Resultantly, I accept this petition and set aside the impugned order. The respondent is present in Court. He has been taken into custody by the police officer.