ORDER SHEET
IN THE ISLAMABAD HIGH COURT, ISLAMABAD
JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
Crl. Misc. No.2134-BC of 2024
The State
Versus
Bushra Imran
S. No. of order Date of order / Order with signature of Judge and that of parties or counsel
/ proceedings Proceedings where necessary.
02. 12.12.2024 Mr. Umair Majeed Malik and Syed Zulfiqar Abbas
Naqvi, learned Special Prosecutors assisted by
Mr. Mudassar Hussain Malik, Advocate, Mr.
Shahid Pervaiz Malik, Assistant Director / IO and
Mr. Wajid Hussain, Assistant Director, FIA.
Barrister Salman Safdar, Ms. Ayesha Khalid and
Mr. Khalid Yousaf Ch., Advocates along with the
respondent in-person.
Through the instant criminal miscellaneous
petition, the State through the Federal
Investigation Agency, seeks the cancellation of
post-arrest bail that was granted to the
respondent, Bushra Imran, vide order dated
23.10.2024 passed by this Court in Crl. Misc.
No.1744-B/2024. The said order dated 23.10.2024
has been assailed by the State before the Hon'ble
Supreme Court in Criminal Petition for Leave to
Appeal No.1161/2024.
2. On 05.12.2024, this Court issued notice to
the respondent. The respondent is in attendance
today.
3. With the assistance of the learned counsel
for the contesting parties, this Court went
through the orders passed by the learned trial
Court after post-arrest bail was granted to the
respondent by this Court vide order dated
23.10.2024. On 02.11.2024, 08.11.2024 and
09.12.2024, the respondent had appeared before
the learned trial Court. On 29.10.2024,
05.11.2024, 14.11.2024, 18.11.2024, 21.11.2024
and 03.12.2024, her application for exemption
from appearance had been allowed by the
2 Crl. Misc. No.2134-BC/2024
learned trial Court. However, vide order dated
03.12.2024, the learned trial Court gave a last and
final opportunity to the respondent to appear
before the learned trial Court, and on 05.12.2024,
her application for exemption from appearance
before the learned trial Court was dismissed and
bailable warrants for her arrest were issued. On
the very next date i.e. 09.12.2024, the respondent
appeared before the learned trial Court and was
warned that she should avoid submitting further
exemption applications.
4. The mere fact that this Court has granted
post-arrest bail to the respondent does not ipso
facto mean that she is exempted from appearing
before the learned trial Court or to retard further
progress in the proceedings before the said
Court. When post-arrest bail is granted by this
Court, the learned trial Court may, by invoking the
provisions of Section 497(5) of the Code of
Criminal Procedure, 1898, cause the person
released on bail to be arrested and commit him to
custody. The learned trial Court is cognizant of its
powers under the said provision since vide order
dated 18.11.2024, a notice was directed to be
served on the respondent that “if on the next date
she failed to appear then the bail so granted will
be cancelled and the bonds submitted shall be
forfeited.”
5. The learned trial Court will be well within its
rights to cancel the respondent’s post-arrest bail
in the event the well-recognized grounds on
which the cancellation of bail can take place
come to exist. These grounds have been
reiterated in the case of Saeed Ullah Vs. The
State (2023 SCMR 1397) and the same are
reproduced herein below:-
3 Crl. Misc. No.2134-BC/2024
“i. If the bail granting order is patently illegal,
erroneous, factually incorrect and has
resulted into miscarriage of justice.
ii. That the accused has misused the concession
of bail in any manner.
iii. That accused has tried to hamper prosecution
evidence by persuading / pressurizing
prosecution witness.
iv. That there is likelihood of absconsion of the
accused beyond the jurisdiction of court.
v. That the accused has attempted to interfere
with the smooth course of investigation.
vi. That accused misused his liberty while
indulging into similar offence.
vii. That some fresh facts and material has been
collected during the course of investigation
which tends to establish guilt of the accused.”
6. In the case of the State Vs. Muhammad
Ashraf Khan Tareen (1990 SCMR 1135), a petition
for leave to appeal was filed before the Hon'ble
Supreme Court against an order passed by the
Hon'ble Peshawar High Court for the grant of
post-arrest bail to the accused. Since the trial
was underway before the learned trial Court, the
Hon'ble Supreme Court held that if the accused at
any stage absents himself from the learned trial
Court, the trial Judge shall be at liberty to cancel
the bail.
7. In view of the above, it is the prerogative of
the learned trial Court to cancel the bail if any
applicable conditions mentioned in the judgment
reported as Saeed Ullah Vs. The State (supra) are
satisfied. With these observations, the instant
petition stands disposed of.
(MIANGUL HASSAN AURANGZEB)
JUDGE
Sultan*
