' This application has been preferred by Mst. Azaida Bibi, petitioner for the cancellation of bail granted to the respondents namely, Doctor Khan son of Islam Gul, Ayub Rehman son of Hati Khan, Hati Khan son of Rasheed Gul and Asmatullah son of Mehrban, by the learned Sessions Judge, Karak vide his order,, dated 22-4-1999. The respondents Ayub Rehman, Hati Khan and Asmatullah moved application for pre-arrest bail before the learned Sessions Judge, Karak while respondent Doctor Khan whose bail application was refused by the Judicial Magistrate, moved separate application for bail. All the respondents are involved in case F.I.R. No,21, dated 30-3-1999 under section 324/34, P.P.C. Of Police Station Kurram, District Karak.
2. The occurrence in the instant case was reported by Mst. Azaida Bibi complainant in Police Station Kurram, District Karak on 30-3-1999 at 8-30 hours wherein she charged all the respondents for effectively firing at her. She has alleged in her report that the occurrence was also witnessed by Mst. Bibi Farhana her mother and the motive for offence was a domestic dispute.
3. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the respondents and the learned A.A.-G. For the State and have gone through the record of the case.
4. At the very outset the learned A.A.-G. Did not challenge the impugned order on the ground that challan in the present case has been submitted in Court and the trial has commenced. According to the learned A.A.-G. The case against the respondents is fixed for evidence in the trial Court. It is a case in which four persons of a family have been charged for effective firing and no positive role has been attributed to anyone of the respondents. The injury sustained by the complainant is reported to be simple in nature by the doctor on her thigh. Since the trial of the respondents has commenced and it is the duty of the trial Court to determine the question of common intention, therefore, the impugned order passed by the learned Sessions Judge at this stage needs no interference because once bail is granted by a competent Court then some strong and exceptional grounds are required to cancel the same. These grounds, however, are not forthcoming on the record. In the circumstances, this petition is dismissed.