' This order would dispose of petition filed by Meraj Din under section 497 (5), Cr. P. C. For the cancellation of bail of Maulvi Sultan, Rashidul-Qamar and Muhammad Siddique respondents. The three respondents and their co-accused submitted bail petition and they were allowed bail by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Multan, on 15-8-1977. A petition for cancellation of bail was moved by Meraj Din against the three respondents in the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Multan, but the same was dismissed on 1-9-1977.
2. The occurrence had taken place on 14-12-1975. The case was registered on 16-12-1975, on the statement of Haji Meraj Din, against the respondents and others. It was disclosed in the F. I. R. That there was a dispute between Ahal-e-Hadees sect and Brelvi sect over the possession of a Janazagah. According to the prosecution version, the accused party had attacked the complainant party in the Janazagah and committed the murder of Mukhtar Ahmad and caused injuries to eleven persons. The allegation against Maulvi Siraj and Rashid-ul-Qamar is that they had held the deceased at the time of occurrence whereas their co-accused Hamid inflicted chhuri blow to the deceased. The allegation against Muhammad Siddique respondent was that he had given knife blow to Suleman P. W. Prior to the registration of this case, a case had been registered against the complainant party on 14-12-1975, on the statement of Barkat Ali. According to his version, the accused mentioned in the said F. I. R. Had opened the attack and were the aggressors, which resulted in the death of Muhammad Sharif and injuries to other witnesses. Four persons namely, Shah Muhammad, Munshi, Muhammad Idrees and Muhammad Rashid were challaned in case which was registered on the statement of Haji Miraj Din. Abdul Hamid and another person were shown in Column No, 2 of the challan. It stood established that the three respondents were not challaned in the case. Subsequently, a complaint was filed by Meraj Din on 1-1-1976 and the respondents and others were summoned by the learned Additional Sessions Judge through bailable warrants vide order dated 15-8-1977. In the F. I. R. No specific part had been assigned to respondents. It was mentioned therein that some of the accused had held the deceased. The complainant made an improvement in the complaint by stating that Sultan and Rashid-ul-Qamar had held the deceased while their co-accused Abdul Hamid gave him chhuri blow. The name of Siddique respondent was not mentioned in the F. I. R. The present case was registered with a delay of two days. Haji Meraj Din was a literate person and he had put down his signature under the report. He was supplied with a copy of the report the same day. The submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner that a false report had been recorded by the S. H.
0., has not appealed, me. In case a wrong report had been recorded, the complainant would not have signed it or after getting a copy of the F. I. R. He would have agitated against the recording of a wrong report and would have moved the higher authorities. The respondents were not challaned by the police and they were summoned on the complaint,' which was filed sixteen days after the registration of the case. The cross case had been registered against the complainant on the day of occurrence.'` After having considered all these circumstances, 1 do not consider it a fit case for the cancellation of bail. The petition is dismissed.