Relief of bail obtained through foul play i.e. concealing fact of earlier dismissal of application for bail, cannot be allowed to perpetuate/remain in the field and (naeem)same is liable to be at once recalled irrespective of merits of the case.
Withdrawing first application and then on the very next day, filing another application through the same counsel while not mentioning dismissal of earlier application resulting into entrustment of 2nd application to another learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sialkot, getting bail from there and even not disclosing earlier dismissal of application at (naeem)the time of final arguments in 2nd application clearly reflects the violation of ratio as well as spirit contained in the case of “The STATE THROUGH ADVOCATE-GENERAL, N.W.F.P. versus ZUBAIR AND 4 OTHERS” (PLD 1986 SC 173) and its revisit (2002 SCMR 171) and “Nazir Ahmed and others versus The State and others” (PLD 2014 Supreme Court 241).
Relief obtained by way of such foul play i.e. concealing dismissal of earlier petition cannot be permitted to remain in the field, therefore, irrespective of the merit of the case, impugned order has been passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sialkot while keeping in view the peculiar facts and circumstances as well as settled principles of law on the subject, therefore, same needs no interference by this Court. It goes without saying that in the case of “Farooq Hussain and others Versus Sheikh Aftab Ahmad and others” (PLD 2020 Supreme Court 617), it has been clearly observed that if the Court having examined the decision challenged before it, is satisfied with its reasoning and conclusions and is of the view that(naeem) it does not call for any interference, then Court can simply endorse the impugned decision and adopt the reasoning of the court below.
Crl. Revision 72289/24
Ehsan Ali Vs The State etc.
Mr. Justice Farooq Haider
18-11-2024
2024 LHC 5229
same is liable to be at once recalled............){kind=link}
0 Comments