Deedar Ali Golo vs Attaullah Golo S — 2025 YLR 1946 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH

Fields are extracted from the reported citation and judgment text. Where a detail is not stated in the record, it is not shown.

Deedar Ali Golo VS Attaullah Golo S. 497(5)---Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss. 365-B, 452 & 395---Kidnapping, house-trespass after preparation for hurt, dacoity---Petition for cancellation of bail, dismissal of---Cancellation of Bail---Grounds---Accused-respondents were charged for kidnapping/abducting the daughter and niece of complainant---Grounds urged for cancellation of bail did not find support from the material collected during investigation---Trial Court granted bail to the accused/respondents on the strength of the material available on record---Principles for cancellation of bail were quite different, and once the Trial Court granted bail to the accused by exercising well-reasoned discretion, then the scope for interference under appellate or revisional jurisdiction of the High Court was very limited and restricted---Grant of bail was nothing but shifting of the custody of the accused in the hands of surety to secure his attendance during trial---Grant of bail during pendency of trial was not a vested and qualified right of the accused, such a concession could be withdrawn when misused---Court would not hesitate to exercise its discretion to cancel bail, if it was established on record that the accused, after securing bail, was involved in a mischief that undermined the administration of justice, attempted to influence or intimidate witnesses, tampered with evidence, repeated the offence while on bail, or violated the conditions imposed by the Court, failed to appear before the Court without just cause, or if new facts come to light that controvert the facts on which bail was granted; the Court may in such a situation revoked the concession of bail---Court may interfere and cancel the bail when it transpires that bail granting order was perverse on the face of it, or the bail was granted in clear disregard and contravention to the settled proposition of law, or the bail was granted against the weight of material available on record, or the Court while granting bail entered into a deeper analysis of material available which prejudiced the case of either side, or the bail granting order was capricious, whimsical or arbitrary in nature and was based upon some erroneous conclusions---In the present case, no illegality or infirmity had been pointed out in the impugned orders to attract any of the grounds for cancellation of bail---Application for cancellation of bail was dismissed in limine.

Deedar Ali Golo vs Attaullah Golo S — 2025 YLR 1946 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2025 YLR