Nadeem

IN THE LAHORE HIGH COURT, MULTAN BENCH, MULTAN.

Crl. Misc. No._____________/B/2001 1. Nadeem S/o Muhammad Ali

caste

Kot Khadim

2. Israr Ahmad S/o Sardar Ahmad

Arain

Ali Shah,

3. Azhar Ali S/o Ghulam Farid, caste Mochi,

Sahiwal.

R/o Street No. 3. Petitioners VERSUS The State.

…………..Respondent Bail Petition U/s 497 Cr.P.C.

F.I.R. No. 483/2001 Dated 13.12.2001 P.S. Harrapa (Sahiwal) U/s 13/14/7/79 (E.H.O.)

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 above-mentioned F.I.R. was registered on the statement of one Shamsher Ali. He stated that he is a cultivator. Last night, he was present in the chak, when he received information that three persons have booked a woman from Sahiwal for the purpose of Zina and came to the house of one Abdul Sattar. Being the holy month of Ramzan, they are inviting the disaster. At about 2.00 A.M., he, along-with P.W’s and others went to the house of said Abdul Sattar. Abdul Sattar and his wife Zarina were sleeping in the Eastern room, when in the Western room, the bulb was on, when they peeped in the room, they saw that the petitioner along-

with said woman were gossiping while sitting on the cots. All they, when felt the presence of complainant, P.W’s and others, they tried to escape, but were caught then and there. On inquiry, all the accused told their names and addresses while Mst. Sakina confessed that she was booked for Rs. 15,00/- and the amount she had left at home. All the accused made treatise, but they had not let them go. Hence, this F.I.R. The certified copy is annexed as Annex “A” and better copy is Annex “A/1”. 3. That the petitioner applied for the grant of after-arrest bail to the learned Sessions Judge, Sahiwal, which was dismissed by the court of learned A.S.J.-II (Malik Riaz Ahmad Khokhar), vide order dated 23.12.2000. Certified copy is Annex “B”. 4. That the petitioners are entitled for the grant of post arrest bail inter alia on the following: GROUNDS a)

That the F.I.R. is a concocted story and a false one against the petitioners.

b)

That the case is registered due to malafide intention and ulterior motive.

c)

That the case is registered with the connivance of local police, due to enmity between Abdul Sattar and complainant.

d)

That the petitioners are innocent and roped up falsely in this case being the relatives of Abdul Sattar.

e)

That if the contents of the F.I.R. are admitted as true, against the petitioner, no offence is constituted.

f)

That the ingredients of Sec-13 & 14 of Enforcement of Hudood Ordinance are not attracted from bare reading of F.I.R.

g)

That the Abdul Sattar is real uncle ( petitioner No. 1 when the real (

)

of

the

) of petitioner No. 2

and petitioner No. 3 was a servant of the petitioners. All the petitioners visited the house of Abdul Sattar in

connection with payment of Eidi to the wife of Abdul Sattar. h)

That the complainant failed to disclose the source of information because it was really no source information and complainant arranged it himself just to pressurise the Abdul Sattar, only opponent in the village.

i)

That

as

per

complainant

the

petitioners

were

apprehended at 2.00 A.M. and handed over to p9olice after 8/9 hours. The matter was not reported to the police at once, even the facility of telephone was available in the village. j)

That as per version of F.I.R. the complainant and others, trespassed in the house of Abdul Sattar, and committed an offence U/s 452 P.P.C. Even the police has no authority to violate the sanctity of Chadar & Char Diwari.

K)

That the lady Mst. Sakina alias Shazia was not present with the petitioners, even not known to them. She was just planted upon the petitioners. This version was also corroborated by the lady co-accused in her bail petition before the learned Sessions Judge, Sahiwal. Copy of application is Annex “C”.

l)

That the petitioners are previous non-convict and also having no record.

m)

That the petitioners are in judicial lock-up and no more required for the purposes of investigation.

n)

That there is no credible and reasonable evidence on the record to connect the petitioners with the offence, hence, the case of petitioners is a case of further inquiry.

o)

That the further detention of the petitioners will serve no useful purpose.

Keeping in view of the above-mentioned submissions, it is respectfully prayed that the post arrest bail may please be allowed to the petitioners. Any other relief, order or direction which this Hon’ble Court deems fit may please be extended in favour of petitioners to meet the ends of justice. Humble Petitioners, Dated: ___________

Through: Hamad 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 clients, that this is the first petition on the subject matter. No such petition has earlier been filed before this Hon’ble Court. Advocate

IN THE LAHORE HIGH COURT, MULTAN BENCH, MULTAN.

Crl. Misc. No._____________/2001 Nadeem etc.

VS.

The State.

Bail Petition U/s 497 Cr.P.C.

AFFIDAVIT of: Nadeem S/o Muhammad Ali, caste Arain, R/o Kot Khadim Ali Shah, Sahiwal. I, the above-named deponent do hereby submit as under: 1. That the names and addresses of the parties have correctly been given for the purpose of their summons and citations. That the above-mentioned F.I.R. was registered on the statement of one Shamsher Ali. He stated that he is a cultivator. Last night, he was present in the chak, when he received information that three persons have booked a woman from Sahiwal for the purpose of Zina and came to the house of one Abdul Sattar. Being the holy month of Ramzan, they are inviting the disaster. At about 2.00 A.M., he, along-with P.W’s and others went to the house of said Abdul Sattar. Abdul Sattar and his wife Zarina were sleeping in the Eastern room, when in the Western room, the bulb was on, when they peeped in the room, they saw that the petitioner along-with said woman were gossiping while sitting on the cots. All they, when felt the presence of complainant, P.W’s and others, they tried to escape, but were caught then and there. On inquiry, all the accused told their names and addresses while Mst. Sakina confessed that she was booked for Rs. 15,00/- and the amount she had left at home. All the accused made treatise, but they had not let them

go. Hence, this F.I.R. The certified copy is annexed as Annex “A” and better copy is Annex “A/1”. That the petitioner applied for the grant of after-arrest bail to the learned Sessions Judge, Sahiwal, which was dismissed by the court of learned A.S.J.-II (Malik Riaz Ahmad Khokhar), vide order dated 23.12.2000. Certified copy is Annex “B”. That the petitioners are entitled for the grant of post arrest bail inter alia on the following: GROUNDS a) That the F.I.R. is a concocted story and a false one against the petitioners. b) That the case is registered due to malafide intention and ulterior motive. c) That the case is registered with the connivance of local police, due to enmity between Abdul Sattar and complainant. d) That the petitioners are innocent and roped up falsely in this case being the relatives of Abdul Sattar. e) That if the contents of the F.I.R. are admitted as true, against the petitioner, no offence is constituted. f) That the ingredients of Sec-13 & 14 of Enforcement of Hudood Ordinance are not attracted from bare reading of F.I.R. g) That the Abdul Sattar is real uncle (

) of the petitioner

No. 1 when the real ( ) of petitioner No. 2 and petitioner No. 3 was a servant of the petitioners. All the petitioners visited the house of Abdul Sattar in connection with payment of Eidi to the wife of Abdul Sattar. h) That the complainant failed to disclose the source of information because it was really no source information and complainant arranged it himself just to pressurise the Abdul Sattar, only opponent in the village.

i) That as per complainant the petitioners were apprehended at 2.00 A.M. and handed over to p9olice after 8/9 hours. The matter was not reported to the police at once, even the facility of telephone was available in the village. j) That as per version of F.I.R. the complainant and others, trespassed in the house of Abdul Sattar, and committed an offence U/s 452 P.P.C. Even the police has no authority to violate the sanctity of Chadar & Char Diwari. k) That the lady Mst. Sakina alias Shazia was not present with the petitioners, even not known to them. She was just planted upon the petitioners. This version was also corroborated by the lady co-accused in her bail petition before the learned Sessions Judge, Sahiwal. Copy of application is Annex “C”. l) That the petitioners are previous non-convict and also having no record. m) That the petitioners are in judicial lock-up and no more required for the purposes of investigation. n) That there is no credible and reasonable evidence on the record to connect the petitioners with the offence, hence, the case of petitioners is a case of further inquiry. o) That the further detention of the petitioners will serve no useful purpose. 5.

That all the contents of the above affidavit are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief and nothing has been kept concealed thereto. DEPONENT IN THE LAHORE HIGH COURT, MULTAN BENCH, MULTAN.

Crl. Misc. No._____________/2001 Nadeem etc.

Vs

The State

INDEX S. No. NAME OF DOCUMENTS

ANNEXES PAGES

1

Urgent Form

2

Bail Petition.

3

Certified copy of F.I.R. & better copy.

A & A/1

9-11

4

Certified copy of order dt. 23.12.2000

B

13-21

5 6

Copy of application. Vakalatnama

C

23-25 27

1-7

PETITIONERS Dated: ____________ Through: Hamad 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.

W.P. No. ______________/2001

Nadeem etc.

Vs

The State

Dispensation application.

AFFIDAVIT of: Nadeem S/o Muhammad Ali, caste Arain, R/o Kot Khadim Ali Shah, Sahiwal.

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 January 2001 that the contents of this affidavit are true & correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. DEPONENT

IN THE LAHORE HIGH COURT, MULTAN BENCH, MULTAN.

In re: C.M. No. _____________/2001 In W.P. No.____________/2001 Nadeem etc.

Vs

The State

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

Respectfully Sheweth:That certified copies of Annexures “__________”are not available. However, uncertified/photo state copies of the same have been annexed with the petition, which are true copies of the original documents. It is, therefore, respectfully prayed that this Hon’ble court may please dispense with the filing of aforesaid copies of the documents. APPLICANTS Dated: __________ (NADEEM etc.) Through: Hamad 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