Islamabad:
The Supreme Court has outlined when higher courts can cancel bail, adding that bail is not an unqualified right and can be withdrawn if abused.
In a three-page order in a case related to cancellation of bail, SC noted that the extent of the interference to be made by SC in its Appel Jurisdiction in Cancellation Cancellation is well attached and hardly needs repetition.
According to the order, author of justice Syed Mansoor Ali Shah, is bail, although an admission awarded to ensure that an accused in pending trial is not an unqualified law.
It said the law recognizes that bail can be canceled if the defendant, after securing release, includes behavior that undermines the justice administration.
Such reasons include attempts to influence or intimidate witnesses, manipulate with evidence, commit another offense while on bail or violate the conditions imposed by the court.
“Furthermore, if the defendant does not appear before the Court for no right, or if new facts emerge that it essentially changes the basis on which bail was awarded, the court can rightly revoke the concession.”
According to the order, the indicative principle remains that a person’s freedom must be balanced towards the need to ensure a fair trial and maintain public confidence in the justice system.
It noted that while he was investigating a bail that provides orders for cancellation, the court usually seizes when the bail order is perverted in light of it or when bail has been awarded in a clear ignoring of some principle of the guarantee law.
“A perverse order is the one that has been passed against the weight of the material on the mail or by ignoring such material or without giving the grounds; such an order is also referred to as arbitrary, quirky and whimsical,” it said.
The order said that one of the basic principles of the guarantee law that courts should not indulge in the exercise of a deeper understanding of material available on a record at the bail stage.
“[They] is only to determine for the time being by looking at such material whether there is any ‘reasonable reasons’ to believe that the defendant is guilty of the alleged offense, “it added.
