249-A Dismissal of

IN THE COURT OF Xth. JM AT KARACHI CENTRAL

CASE No. 2315/2012

The STATE VS Muhammad Taslim & others

FIR No. 85/12

WRITTEN ARGUMENTS FOR APPLICATION

U/S. 249-A CRPC
On behalf of the Complainant, above named, it is respectfully submitted that this Hon’ble Court
may be pleased to dismiss Application U/S. 249-A Cr.P.C. in consideration of the following grounds:

GROUNDS
1. The complainant has rightly lodged FIR against offence and illegal act committed by the accused persons
above named.

2. That if some cases pending before any court of law between one of the P.Ws and accused namely
Muhammad Tasleem then it does not concern to the complainant or with instant case.

3. That it is incorrect that complainant is the tenant of the applicant/accused, the accused persons prepared a
forged, fabricated Tenancy Agreement. That accused namely Muhammad Tasleem filed a Rent Case
bearing No. 453/2012 on forged, fabricated Tenancy Agreement which has been dismissed as having no
merit for consideration by competent Hon’ble 3rd. Rent Controller Karachi Central.
True Copy of ORDER passed by Hon’ble 3rd. Rent Controller Karachi Central is annexed herewith and
marked as annexure “A”.
4. That it is incorrect being false, frivolous and baseless that due to enmity and family disputes the accuseds
were implicated but their own offence, if other witnesses are interested or employee of the complainant
then it is put to strict proof and if so, as allegedly, the evidence cannot be discarded summarily without
giving opportunity to prosecution witnesses.

Relied upon: 2000 P Cr. L J 752 Karachi, it was HELD.

Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)---
---S. 249-A & 417(2-A)---If the complainant/prosecution is not given opportunity to
prove the allegations leveled in FIR and it could not also be that there is no
probability of conviction of accused because the recovery Mashirs are allegedly
interested person---Trial court acquitted the accused on the ground that the
recovery witnesses were interested witnesses---Validity---Such recovery witnesses
could not be intersted persons without they being examined by the Trial Court and
in the absence of any evidence to that effect---Trial Court had no material/evidence
to justify the order of acquittal and the same had resulted in miscarriage of justice---
Such order of acquittal was of no legal effect and was set aside in circumstances.
2000 P Cr. L J 752 Karachi.

Relied upon: 2000 MLD 220, it was HELD

Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)---
---S. 249-A & 417---Trial Court had passed order of acquittal under section S. 249-A,
Cr.P.C---Such order was passed summarily upon a denial of an opportunity to the
prosecution to produce its witnesses whose attendance had to be procured by the
Trial Court by adopting all the legal method---Thus non-appearance of the
prosecution witnesses cannot be said to be due to the laxity of complainant---
Without application of independent mind to the facts of the case the same was nullity
in the eyes of law and was set aside---Case was remanded to the Trial Court to take up
the proceedings afresh. 2000 MLD 220
5. That is incorrect being false, and baseless that prosecution did not produce the witnesses against the
applicant/accused to prove charge, while fact is that prosecution witnesses are attending this Hon’ble Court
since last date of hearing. Hence this application is infractious.

6. That instant case should be decided on merits as prosecution witnesses are available and
attending/appearing to prove charge before this Hon’ble Court and probability exists the accused being
convicted of the offence.

PRAYER
It is, therefore, most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to dismiss
Application U/S. 249-A Cr.P.C., under the facts and circumstances mentioned above.
Prayed accordingly in the interest of Justice.
Karachi.
Dated: 26/07/13.

S M ZUBAIR
Advocate for the Applicant