Amir Zada

IN THE LAHORE HIGH COURT, MULTAN BENCH, MULTAN.

W.P. No._____________/2002 Amir Zada S/o Haji Raza Khan, caste Pathan, R/o Kot Haji Gulzar, Kamal Bazar, Dera Ismail Khan. Petitioner VERSUS 1. State. 2. Muhammad Arshad S/o Shah Din, caste Arain, R/o Chak No. 255/EB, Tehsil Burewala, District Vehari. 3. S.H.O.

P.S. Gaggo,

4. Riaz Ahmad A.S.I.

District Vehari.

5. D.S.P. (Legal) Vehari. 6. Judicial Magistrate, Police Station Gaggo, Burewala, District Vehari. Respondents Writ Petition under Article 199 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973.

Respectfully Sheweth: 1. That the names and addresses of the parties have correctly been given for the purpose of their summons and citations. 2. That the petitioner purchased a Bedford bus No. 9975/FDF from Muhammad Iqbal Javed S/o Noor Muhammad caste Jat, resident of P-613 Hussain Bazar, Haji Abad (district Faisal Abad) in lieu of consideration (Rs. 590,000/- + 10,000/- for miscellaneous expenses) Rs. 600,000/- on an open transfer letter. The amount was paid to said Muhammad Iqbal Javed in the presence of

Muhammad Suleman and Ch. Talib Hussain while the registration book, transfer letter and the possession of said bus was also delivered to the petitioner then and there. The ownership of the said bus was transferred in the name of the petitioner and the said bus was converted into a truck on 5.1.2000. Copy of registration is Annex “A”. 3. That on 14.2.2000 the respondent No. 2 submitted an application before the Excise and Taxation Officer/Motor Registration Authority Faisalabad stating thereby that he is owner of said bus and one Raza Khan after obtaining the copy of Identity Card from somewhere got transferred the said vehicle in his name through a forged transfer letter. However, he admitted that he agreed to sell the said vehicle to Muhammad Iqbal alias Bala but no consideration was paid to him. He also alleged that the said Muhammad Iqbal alias Bala committed the forgery and requested for the cancellation of ownership from the name of said Raza Khan. On this application, the Excise & Taxation Officer/Motor Registration Authority, Faisalabad issued notices to the petitioner and said Muhammad Iqbal alias Bala. Copies of application and Notice are Annexes “B & C”. 4. That the application dated 14.2.2000 was even subjudice before Excise and Taxation Officer/Motor Registration Authority, Faisalabad when a notice from the S.P. city Faisalabad was received to the petitioner to attend the office of A.D.C. (G) Faisalabad on 2.5.2000. The petitioner attended the office of A.D.C. (G) on 2.5.2000. Then it transpired to the petitioner that the

application

submitted

by

the

respondent

No. 2 is actually submitted before the District Monitoring Cell, Faisalabad. Looking at the conduct and behaviour of respondent No. 2, the petitioner filed a civil suit in the court of Senior Civil Judge, Faisalabad, which was entrusted for further hearing to the court of Rana Aftab Ahmad Khan, Civil Judge. In this suit, the respondent No. 2 was placed as defendant No. 4. The respondent No. 2 filed his written statement on 7.6.2000 in which changed his version and he categorically admitted that he agreed to sell the

vehicle in question in lieu of the consideration of Rs. 590,000/- to the petitioner. The respondent No. 2 also admitted that he received

Rs. 186,000/- from the petitioner and the remaining

amount Rs. 404,000/- was agreed to be paid on 24.11.99. Copies of notice, plaint and written statement are Annexes “D, E & F”. 5. That during the pendency of proceedings in Civil Court, before Excise and Taxation Officer/Motor Registration Authority, Faisalabad and District Monitoring Cell, Faisalabad, the respondent No. 2, in connivance with the police got registered a case at Police Station Gaggo (Vehari) against the petitioner and others vide F.I.R. No. 223/2000 dated 26.8.2000 under section 381-A P.P.C. with a new version. During the investigation, offences under seciton 420, 468 and 471 P.P.C. were added. The petitioner filed a constitutional petition No. 10802/2000 titled “Amir Zada Vs. the State etc.”, seeking the quashment of this F.I.R. This petition was disposed of on 12.12.2000 by His Lordship Mr. Justice Basheer A. Mujahid, directing the petitioner to join the investigation and production of relevant documents before the Investigation Officer. On the appearance and production of documents before the Investigation Officer, the said F.I.R. was cancelled accordingly on 22.1.2001. Copy of W.P., Order, F.I.R. and cancellation report are Annexures “G, H, J & K”. 6.

That during the course of investigation of F.I.R. No. 223/2000 a bus was taken into possession, on the pointation of respondent No. 2, claiming to be the same as mentioned in the F.I.R. The respondent No. 2 submitted an application for Superdari before the learned Judicial Magistrate concerned who after obtaining the report from the police/S.H.O. police station Gaggo, refused the same vide order dated 29.2.2000. This order was assailed through a Revision Petition by the respondent No. 2 before the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Burewala, who vide order dated 13.1.2001, allowed the Revision Petition. Copy of application dated 27.9.2000, order dated 29.9.2000, Revision Petition dated 5.10.2000 and

impugned judgment dated 13.1.2001 are Annexures “L, M, N & O”. 7.

That one Syed Ibrar Yazdani came forward by filing a W.P. No. 864/2001, that the police of Police Station Gaggo took his bus No. 560/LHJ, into possession; and not going to return the same to him. The S.H.O. concerned was summoned by this Hon’ble Court on 16.2.2001. The S.H.O. concerned alongwith Shaukat Ali A.S.I. appeared in the court and maid statements. The order passed is reproduced as under: Ch. Muhammad Ilyas, Advocate for petitioner. Saghir Ahmad Watoo, S.H.O. and Shaukat Ali A.S.I. “It is stated by the police officials present in the Court that F.I.R. No. 323/2000 registered at Police Station Gaggo has already been cancelled. It is further stated that bus in question is in possession of Muhammad Arshad. At this stage, learned counsel requests that he be allowed to implead Muhammad Arshad as a party. He may do so within a week. Office is directed to fix W.P. no. 10802/2000 along-with the instant petition. Re-list on 12.3.2001.” Sd/(NAZIR AHMAD SIDDIQUI) JUDGE. In view of this order Muhammad Arshad Sabir (respondent No. 2 in this petition) was impleaded as respondent No. 4 in that petition on the next date.

8.

That as the petitioner was bonafide purchaser of the bus No. 9975/FDF, which was converted into truck with due permission; and was further delivered in due course of business.

This

vehicle

No.

9975/FDF

was

never

recovered/taken into possession by the police in connection with F.I.R. No. 323. Order dated 13.1.2001 passed by the learned ASJ, Burewala was a result of connivance between

respondents No. 2 & 3. As soon as this order came to the knowledge of the petitioner, the said order was impugned through W.P. No. 1953/2001 in this Hon’ble Court. 9.

That on 12.3.2001, both the petitions were fixed for hearing. The W.P. No. 1953/2001 was admitted for regular hearing while the order passed in W.P. No. 846/2001 is reproduced as under: Ch. Muhammad Ilyas, Advocate. Mr. Ayaz Ahmad Chaudhry, Advocate. Saghir Wattoo, S.H.O. (respondent No. 2) “S.H.O. states that as per his inquiry made from the Excise & Taxation Office, Lahore and Faisalabad, respondent No. 4 has obtained Superdari of vehicle in question on wrong premises of facts. Since connected W.P. No. 1953/2001 has already been admitted to regular hearing and fixed for 28.3.2001, this petition shall also be heard along-with the same.” Sd/(NAZIR AHMAD SIDDIQUI) JUDGE. However, both the petitions were disposed of vide order dated 26.9.2001. Copy of order is Annexure “P”.

10.

That during the last month, the respondent No. 4 raided the residence and place of business of petitioner for many times. The petitioner explored the matter and found that on the opinion given by the respondent No. 5, the learned respondent No. 6 granted the permission for investigation; and in due course of the investigation the respondent No. 4 obtained nonbailable warrants on 8.1.2002 and then obtained permission for proclamation in connection with proceedings under section 87/88 Cr.P.C. on 15.1.2002. Copies are Annexures “Q & R”.

11.

That the F.I.R. No. 323/2000 dated 26.8.2000 under section 381-A, added offences 420/468/471 P.P.C. registered at Police

Station Gaggo (Vehari), opinion of respondent No. 5 and orders dated 8.1.2002 & 15.1.2002 requested by respondent No. 4 and passed by respondent No. 6 are liable to be quashed interalia on the following: GROUNDS a)

That no occurrence has been happened and the case is prima facie false on its face.

b)

That as per own version of respondent No. 2, no vehicle was present at the time of occurrence within the territorial jurisdiction of P.S. Gaggo, so, the case is a concocted story.

c)

That after the verification of the particulars of both the vehicles, addition of offences became redundant.

d)

That there is concealment of facts on the part of respondent No. 2, even the behaviour of respondent No. 2 is contemptuous and liable to be prosecuted.

e)

That the written statement filed by the respondent No. 2 in the civil court is quite different from the stand taken in the F.I.F., as well as in application before E.T.O./Motor Registration Authority.

f)

That in the written statement of the respondent No. 2 challenged his version and categorically admitted that he sold the said vehicle to the petitioner in lieu of Rs. 590,000/-. Out of this consideration, the respondent No. 2 had received a sum of Rs. 186,000/- and delivered the possession of the said vehicle to the petitioner and Rs. 404,000/- are still outstanding against the petitioner. This admission of respondent No. 2 itself is enough to make the case in hand to be of a civil nature.

g)

That criminal proceedings are initiated in a civil matter illegally and unlawfully, just to pressurise the petitioner and others nominated in the F.I.R.

h)

That the opinion given by respondent No. 5 is arbitrary, capricious and fanciful in the given circumstances.

i)

That the proceedings initiated by respondent No. 4 having no value in the eyes of law, particularly in the presence of a conclusion on the file that no occurrence, whatsoever ever took place as stated in the F.I.R.

j)

That orders dated 8.1.2002 and 15.1.2002 respectively passed by the respondent No. 6 are a result of nonreading and mis-reading of the facts on the file, especially when both the requests brought before respondent No. 6 by respondent No. 4 were not duly forwarded by any Inspector (Legal) of the Court. Both the orders were passed in haste and without application of judicial mind.

k)

That the petitioner is bonafide purchaser from Muhammad Iqbal Javed and involved in this case under the malafide intention and ulterior motive.

g)

That there is sufficient documentary evidence on the file to prove the petitioner and others that they had not committed any offence.

h)

That the respondent No. 2 has roots in the bureaucracy and police. By taking the benefits of his relations, the respondent No. 2 is causing illegal and unlawful harassment to the petitioner.

12.

That the petitioner has left with no other adequate, alternate, efficacious and speedy remedy except to invoke the Constitutional jurisdiction of this Hon’ble Court. Hence, this petition.

In view of the above submissions, it is respectfully prayed that the case F.I.R. No. 223/2000 dated 26.8.2000 U/s 381-A at P.S. Gaggo District Vehari, opinion of respondent No. 5 and orders dated 8.1.2002 & 15.1.2002 may please be quashed in the interest of justice. It is further prayed that any order, direction, writ or relief which this Hon’ble Court deems fit, may graciously be awarded to meet the ends of justice. Humble Petitioner, Dated: ___________

Through: Hammad Afzal Bajwa, Advocate High Court, 28-District Courts, Multan. C.C. No. 20959

Sheikh Muhammad Faheem, Advocate High Court, 28-District Courts, Multan. C.C. No. 20176

CERTIFICATE: Certified as per instructions of the client, that this is the 2nd petition on the subject matter. Office is requested to put up the files of W.P. No. 10802/2000, W.P. 864/2001 & 1953/2001 with this petition. Advocate

IN THE LAHORE HIGH COURT, MULTAN BENCH, MULTAN.

W.P. No. ______________/2002

Amir Zada

Vs

The State etc.

AFFIDAVIT of: Amir Zada S/o Haji Raza Khan, caste Pathan, R/o Kot Haji Gulzar, Kamal Bazar, Dera Ismail Khan.

I, the above named deponent do hereby solemnly affirm and declare that the contents of the above petition are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief and nothing has been kept concealed thereto.

DEPONENT

Verification: Verified on oath at Multan, this _____ day of February 2002 that the contents of this affidavit are true to the best of my knowledge and belief. DEPONENT

IN THE LAHORE HIGH COURT, MULTAN BENCH, MULTAN.

In re: C.M. No. _____________/2002 In W.P. No.____________/2002 Amir Zada

Vs

The State etc.

APPLICATION FOR SUSPENSION OF ORDERS DATED 8.1.2002 AND 15.1.2002.

Respectfully Sheweth: 1.

That the above-captioned petition is being filed before this Hon’ble Court. The contents of which may be considered as part and parcel of this application.

2.

That a civil matter is converted into a criminal one just to pressurise and influence the petitioner and others, nominated in the F.I.R.

3.

That the both the above mentioned orders have no value in the eyes of law when already a conclusion of investigation is on the file that no such occurrence has ever taken place.

4.

That the request for both these orders was made with malafide intention and ulterior motive.

5.

That both these orders were procured by the connivance of police and complainant.

6.

That no legal formalities had been completed before obtaining these orders.

7.

That both these orders were passed in haste and without application of judicial mind. In view of the above submissions, it is humbly prayed that the operation of both the above mentioned orders may please be suspended till the final disposal of the case. Humble Applicant/Petitioner

Dated: ___________

Through: Hammad Afzal Bajwa, Advocate High Court, 28-District Courts, Multan. C.C. No. 20959

Sheikh Muhammad Faheem, Advocate High Court, 28-District Courts, Multan. C.C. No. 20176

IN THE LAHORE HIGH COURT, MULTAN BENCH, MULTAN.

In re: C.M. No. _____________/2002 In W.P. No.____________/2002 Amir Zada

Vs

The State etc.

APPLICATION FOR DISPENSING WITH THE FILING OF CERTIFIED COPIES OF ANNEXURES. =========================================

Respectfully Sheweth:That certified copies of Annexures “A to P & S” are not available. However, uncertified/photo state copies of the same have been annexed with the Petition, which are true copies of original documents. It is, therefore, respectfully prayed that this Hon’ble court may please dispense with the filing of aforesaid copies of documents. Humble Applicant

Dated: __________ (AMIR ZADA) Through: Hammad Afzal Bajwa, Advocate High Court, 28-District Courts, Multan. C.C. No. 20959

Sheikh Muhammad Faheem, Advocate High Court, 28-District Courts, Multan. C.C. No. 20176

IN THE LAHORE HIGH COURT, MULTAN BENCH, MULTAN.

In re: C.M. No. _____________/2002 In W.P. No.____________/2002 Amir Zada

Vs

The State etc.

APPLICATION FOR SUSPENSION OF ORDERS.

AFFIDAVIT of: Amir Zada S/o Haji Raza Khan, caste Pathan, R/o Kot Haji Gulzar, Kamal Bazar, Dera Ismail Khan.

I, the above named deponent do hereby solemnly affirm and declare that the contents of the above application are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief and nothing has been kept concealed thereto. DEPONENT Verification: Verified on oath at Multan, this _____ day of February 2002 that the contents of this affidavit are true to the best of my knowledge and belief. DEPONENT

IN THE LAHORE HIGH COURT, MULTAN BENCH, MULTAN.

W.P. No.____________/2002 Amir Zada

Vs

The State etc.

INDEX S. No. NAME OF DOCUMENTS

ANNEXES PAGES

1 2

Urgent Form Stamp Paper worth Rs. 500/-

3

Writ Petition.

4

Affidavit

5

Copy of registration.

6

Copies of application & Notice.

7

Copies of notice, plaint and written D, E & F statement. Copy of W.P., Order, F.I.R. and G, H, J & K cancellation report. Copy of application dated 27.9.2000, L, M, N & O order dated 29.9.2000, Revision Petition dated 5.10.2000 and impugned judgment dated 13.1.2001 Copy of order dated 26.9.2001. P

8 9

10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17

A

Copy of order dated 8.1.2002 & 15.1.2002. Copy of report. Dispensation Application. Affidavit. Application for suspension of orders. Affidavit. Vakalatnama

B&C

Q&R S

PETITIONER Dated: ____________ Through: Hammad Afzal Bajwa, Advocate High Court, 28-District Courts, Multan. C.C. No. 20959

Sheikh Muhammad Faheem, Advocate High Court, 28-District Courts, Multan. C.C. No. 20176