' The petitioner, in the first instance, reported to the police that his son had committed suicide on 9- 2-1998 at about 10-20 a.m. A few days later he turned around and informed the police that his son had been murdered. Accordingly F.I.R. No,25, was registered against Rabnawaz, Haqnawaz and Bilal accused/respondents on 15-2-1998. After their arrest they were released on bail by the Judicial Magistrate, D.I. Khan (Mr. Badruddin Khan) vide his order, dated 25-2-1998.
2. Aggrieved, the petitioner moved the Court of Additional Sessions Judge, D.I. Khan for the cancellation of bail granted to the accused/respondents. His prayer was,. However, turned down and the bail granting order of the Judicial Magistrate was kept intact by the Additional Sessions Judge, Mr. Muhammad Yousaf Khan by his order recorded on 316-1998. Hence this bail cancellation petition.
3. Mr. Ghulam Muhammad Sappal, Advocate learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Saleem Nawaz Awan, Advocate learned counsel for accused/ respondents Nos.1 to 3 and Syed Saeed Hassan Sherazi, learned Assistant Advocate-General for the State present and heard. Record of the case perused with some degree of care.
4. A perusal of the record would show that occurrence took place at night time which was not witnessed by anybody, 'including the complainant, who had, at the relevant time, reportedly gone out of his house for some work.
5. Beside this the contents of the application submitted by the petitioner to the Superintendent of Police, D.I. Khan cannot be lost sight of. It is because in that application the petitioner had himself stated that:-
6. This contention of the petitioner clearly contradicts the very contents of the F.I.R., which was registered at his instance. This contradiction, which of course is quite fatal in nature, could not be explained by the learned counsel for the petitioner when he was confronted with the contents of the F.I.R. And the application submitted before the Superintendent of Police. In point of fact he had no answer at all.
7. In the circumstances, I am of the view that no illegality or irregularity has been committed by the Additional Sessions Judge in refusing to cancel/recall the order vide, which bail was granted to the respondents. Accordingly, I do not see 'any justification to interfere with the discretion existed by him.
8. This petition is frivolous, without any substance and is, therefore, dismissed.