Islamabad:
The Supreme Court has described when the upper courts can cancel the bond, and added that the bond is not an unqualified right and can be removed, if used incorrectly.
In an order of three pages in a case related to the cancellation of the bond, the SC indicated that the scope of the interference that the SC in its jurisdiction of appeal in matters of cancellation of bail is well established and barely needs repetition.
According to the order, written by Judge Syed Mansoor Ali Shah, a bond, although a concession granted to guarantee the freedom of a defendant pending judgment, is not an unqualified right.
He said the law recognizes that the bond can be canceled if the accused, after ensuring release, is involved in a conduct that undermines the administration of justice.
These reasons include attempts to influence or intimidate witnesses, manipulate evidence, commit another crime while being released on bail or violating the conditions imposed by the court.
“In addition, if the defendant does not appear before the court without a fair case, or if the new facts come to light that materially alter the basis on which the bond was granted, the court can justifiably revoke the concession.”
According to the order, the guiding principle remains that the freedom of an individual must be balanced with the need to guarantee a fair judgment and maintain public confidence in the justice system.
He pointed out that when examining an order of bail grant for the purpose of canceling, the court generally interferes when the bail order is perverse to it, or when the bond has been granted without taking into account some principle of the bond law.
“A perverse order is the one that has passed against the weight of the material in the registry or ignoring said material or without giving reasons; said order is also called arbitrary, capricious and capricious,” he said.
The order said that one of the elementary principles of the bail law that the courts should not enjoy the exercise of a deeper appreciation of the material available in the bail stage.
“[They] They are only to tentatively determine, observing such material, whether or not there are “reasonable reasons” to believe that the accused person is guilty of the alleged crime, “he added.
