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 ( ) 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.
 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, Sheikh Muhammad Faheem,
Advocate High Court, Advocate High Court,
28-District Courts, Multan. 28-District Courts, Multan.
C.C. No. 20959 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. 1-7
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 Copy of application. C 23-25
6 Vakalatnama 27

PETITIONERS

Dated: ____________

Through: -
Hamad Afzal Bajwa, Sheikh Muhammad Faheem,
Advocate High Court, Advocate High Court,
28-District Courts, Multan. 28-District Courts, Multan.
C.C. No. 20959 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, Sheikh Muhammad Faheem,
Advocate High Court, Advocate High Court,
28-District Courts, Multan. 28-District Courts, Multan.
C.C. No. 20959 C.C. No. 20176