Mere Addition of a New Section in the FIR after the grant of Bail does not justify its Cancellation unless Misuse or Obstruction of justice is established --- Islamabad High Court, Islamabad

Islamabad 26-02-2025: The Islamabad High Court (IHC) has restored the bail of accused, ruling that the cancellation of his bail by the Additional Sessions Judge was illegal and without jurisdiction. The decision, issued by Mr. Justice Inaam Amin Minhas, emphasized that mere addition of a new section in the FIR after the grant of bail does not justify its cancellation unless misuse or obstruction of justice is established.  

The case stems from FIR No. 496, registered on July 28, 2023, at Police Station Tarnol, Islamabad, against the petitioner and his co-accused. The FIR initially invoked Sections 420, 468, 471, 381, and 34 of the Pakistan Penal Code (PPC), alleging forgery and fraudulent transfer of a vehicle’s ownership using fake documents.  

The co-accused was granted bail on February 16, 2024, while accused was arrested on September 20, 2024, and later granted post-arrest bail by the Judicial Magistrate on October 3, 2024. However, Respondent No.2 (the complainant) moved an application under Section 497(5) Cr.P.C., seeking cancellation of bail, which was accepted by the Additional Sessions Judge on December 5, 2024. The petitioner then challenged the order in criminal revision before the Islamabad High Court (IHC).   

Mr. Justice Inaam Amin Minhas ruled that the prosecution acted with malafide intent by concealing material facts before the Judicial Magistrate. The Court noted that:  

1. The Investigating Officer (IO) failed to disclose the addition of Section 467 PPC (forgery of a valuable security) when the bail application was being heard.  
2. The prosecution’s conduct raised serious concerns about fairness, as new charges were seemingly introduced to manipulate the judicial process.  
3. Citing the Supreme Court of Pakistan precedent in Muhammad Tanveer Vs. The State (PLD 2017 SC 733), the Court reiterated that bail cannot be canceled on grounds that were not raised before the trial Court unless malafide intent is proven.  

The Islamabad High Court (IHC) referred to Supreme Court of Pakistan rulings in Saeed Ullah Vs. The State (2023 SCMR 1397) and Muzafar Iqbal Vs. Muhammad Imran Aziz (2004 SCMR 231), which set out the grounds for bail cancellation, including:  

1. If the bail order is patently illegal, erroneous, or results in a miscarriage of justice.  
2. If the accused misuses the bail concession or interferes with prosecution witnesses.  
3. If there is a likelihood of the accused absconding.  
4. If fresh material emerges, establishing the guilt of the accused.  

The Court found that none of these conditions were met, making the bail cancellation unjustified.  

The Court condemned the practice of altering FIR sections after bail has been granted, stating that:  

The ruling aligns with the Supreme Court’s decision in The State Vs. Muhammad Sarwar (2017 SCMR 1993), which held that once bail is granted, it should not be withdrawn unless compelling reasons exist.  

In light of the prosecution’s concealment of material facts and the absence of valid grounds for bail cancellation, the Islamabad High Court (IHC) accepted the revision petition and set aside the December 5, 2024 order of the Additional Sessions Judge. The bail order dated October 3, 2024, was reinstated.  

Judicial discretion in bail matters cannot be overridden by subsequent modifications to the FIR. Mere dissatisfaction of the complainant is not a valid ground for bail cancellation. Prosecution must act in good faith; suppression of material facts can invalidate its claims. Once bail is granted, it should not be withdrawn unless clear misuse or obstruction of justice is proven.

Powered by Froala Editor