You are on page 1of 8

IN THE LAHORE HIGH COURT, MULTAN BENCH,

MULTAN.

Crl. Misc. No._____________CB/2002

Noor Ahmad S/o Basheer Ahmad, caste Sagla, R/o Chak No.
56/GD, P.S. Noor Shah, District Sahiwal.
Petitioner
VERSUS
1. The State.
2. Hashmat Ali S/o Qutab Ali, caste Sagla, R/o 56/GD, Tehsil &
District Sahiwal.
Respondents

Petition for cancellation of bail U/s 497 (5) Cr.P.C.

Case:
F.I.R. No. 524/20001 Dated: 23.9.2001
U/s: 302, 324, 148, 149 P.P.C.
P.S. Noor Shah (Sahiwal).

Respectfully Sheweth: -
1. That the names and addresses of the respective parties have
correctly been given in the caption of the petition for the purpose
of their summons and citations.

2. That the F.I.R. in his case was registered on the statement of


Noor Ahmad (petitioner). He stated that on 23.9.2001 at 9:30
A.M., the complainant Noor Ahmad, along-with his father Bashir
Ahmad, uncle Mamand and brothers Lal Khan and Zahoor
Ahmad, came towards the fields for cutting fodder and for
watering his paddy field. When they reached in the Eastern side
of the paddy crop of Hanif son of Mehr Din, the accused Allah
Yar, armed with rifle 7-mm, Ali Sher armed with 12-bore gun,
Hashmat Ali (present petitioner) armed with Soti, Nousher armed
with gun 12-bore, Ashraf, Qutab, Mamand, Bashir and Iqbal,
accused persons armed with Sotas, abruptly made their
appearance there when Mamand accused raised Lalkara that
members of the complainant party be taught lesson for disgracing
Allah Yar. Then and there, Ashraf accused gave Sota blow on the
head near upper part of left ear of Lal Khan, complainant’s
brother; Qutab accused gave Sota blow which landed on the head
on the upper part of the left ear of Lal Khan, aforementioned;
Nousher accused gave firearm injury with his gun 12-bore which
hit him on the back of his left hand. Meanwhile, Ali Sher,
accused gave 12-bore gun injury to Lal Khan on his left arm and
on the left part of his chest, where-after, he fell on the ground.
The members of the complainant party stepped forward to rescue
Lal Khan when all the accused persons gave Sota and rifle butt
blows to them and thereafter, they succeeded to flee away from
the venue of occurrence, the petitioner/accused herein Hashmat
Ali also sustained injuries due to the firing of the members of the
accused party. However, Lal Khan, the complainant’s brother,
succumbed to the injuries at the spot. The cause of malice is
stated to be that sometime before the present occurrence, the
complainant’s brother Lal Khan had some scuffle with Allah Yar
accused, in which, Lal Khan and Zahoor, the complainant’s
brother, had given beating to Allah Yar. In retaliation of this
scuffle, the members of the accused party alleged to have made
murderous assault upon the members of the complainant party
causing death of Lal Khan, brother of the complainant. Copy of
the F.I.R. is Annex “A”.

3. That the respondent No. 2 in this case applied for the grant of
post arrest bail and the same was allowed by the learned A.S.J.
Sahiwal vide order dated 11.2.2002. Copy of order is Annex “B”.
4. That the impugned order dated 11.2.2002 is liable to be set aside
inter-alia on the following: -

GROUNDS

i) That the impugned order is against the norms of natural


justice and prevailing law.

ii) That no doubt, no injury is attributed to the respondent


No. 2, in F.I.R., but the respondent No. 2 is fully
implicated in the statement of witnesses/injured
witnesses.

iii) That the impugned order is passed on the basis of


deeper appreciation of evidence, which is always
deprecated by the higher courts.

iv) That the presence of the respondent No. 2 was proved


on the spot. His presence coupled with the factum of
causing injury to witness (Noor Ahmad) is sufficient to
disentitle the respondent No. 2 from the relief, graced
by the lower court.

v) That the act, conduct and rule attributed to the


respondent No. 2 is falling within the preview of
facilitation, common intention and vicarious liability.

vi) That the observation of the learned lower court


regarding the ailment of respondent No. 2 is against the
opinion of Medical Board constituted by the orders of
the learned lower court.

vii) That the impugned order is patently illegal, unlawful


and without consideration of judicial mind.

viii) That the impugned order is perverse, capricious and


against the facts of the case.

Keeping in view the above-mentioned


circumstances, it is respectfully prayed that the
impugned order may please be set aside/recalled and
the concession of bail graced to the respondent No. 2
may please be withdrawn.

Any other relief which this Hon’ble court deems


fit, may please be extended in the favour of petitioner to
meet the ends of justice.

Humble petitioner,

Dated: ___________

Through: -
Hammad 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 client,
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._____________CB/2002

Noor AhmadVs. The State etc.

INDEX

S. No. DESCRIPTION OF DOCUMENTS ANNEXES PAGES


1 Urgent Form
2 Crl. Miscellaneous.
3 Affidavit
4 Copy of F.I.R. A
5 Copy of order dated 11.2.2002. B
6 Vakalatnama.

PETITIONER
Dated: ____________

Through: -
Hammad 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.
Crl. Misc. No._____________CB/2002

Noor AhmadVs. The State etc.

AFFIDAVIT of: -
Noor Ahmad S/o Basheer Ahmad, caste Sagla, R/o
Chak No. 56/GD, P.S. Noor Shah, District Sahiwal.

I, the above named deponent do hereby solemnly affirm


and declare as under: -

1. That the names and addresses of the respective parties have


correctly been given in the caption of the petition for the
purpose of their summons and citations.

2. That the F.I.R. in his case was registered on the statement of


Noor Ahmad (petitioner). He stated that on 23.9.2001 at 9:30
A.M., the complainant Noor Ahmad, along-with his father
Bashir Ahmad, uncle Mamand and brothers Lal Khan and
Zahoor Ahmad, came towards the fields for cutting fodder and
for watering his paddy field. When they reached in the Eastern
side of the paddy crop of Hanif son of Mehr Din, the accused
Allah Yar, armed with rifle 7-mm, Ali Sher armed with 12-
bore gun, Hashmat Ali (present petitioner) armed with Soti,
Nousher armed with gun 12-bore, Ashraf, Qutab, Mamand,
Bashir and Iqbal, accused persons armed with Sotas, abruptly
made their appearance there when Mamand accused raised
Lalkara that members of the complainant party be taught
lesson for disgracing Allah Yar. Then and there, Ashraf
accused gave Sota blow on the head near upper part of left ear
of Lal Khan, complainant’s brother; Qutab accused gave Sota
blow which landed on the head on the upper part of the left
ear of Lal Khan, aforementioned; Nousher accused gave
firearm injury with his gun 12-bore which hit him on the back
of his left hand. Meanwhile, Ali Sher, accused gave 12-bore
gun injury to Lal Khan on his left arm and on the left part of
his chest, where-after, he fell on the ground. The members of
the complainant party stepped forward to rescue Lal Khan
when all the accused persons gave Sota and rifle butt blows to
them and thereafter, they succeeded to flee away from the
venue of occurrence, the petitioner/accused herein Hashmat
Ali also sustained injuries due to the firing of the members of
the accused party. However, Lal Khan, the complainant’s
brother, succumbed to the injuries at the spot. The cause of
malice is stated to be that sometime before the present
occurrence, the complainant’s brother Lal Khan had some
scuffle with Allah Yar accused, in which, Lal Khan and
Zahoor, the complainant’s brother, had given beating to Allah
Yar. In retaliation of this scuffle, the members of the accused
party alleged to have made murderous assault upon the
members of the complainant party causing death of Lal Khan,
brother of the complainant. Copy of the F.I.R. is Annex “A”.

3. That the respondent No. 2 in this case applied for the grant of
post arrest bail and the same was allowed by the learned
A.S.J. Sahiwal vide order dated 11.2.2002. Copy of order is
Annex “B”.

4. That the impugned order dated 11.2.2002 is liable to be set


aside inter-alia on the following: -

GROUNDS

i) That the impugned order is against the norms of natural


justice and prevailing law.

ii) That no doubt, no injury is attributed to the respondent


No. 2, in F.I.R., but the respondent No. 2 is fully
implicated in the statement of witnesses/injured
witnesses.

iii) That the impugned order is passed on the basis of


deeper appreciation of evidence, which is always
deprecated by the higher courts.

iv) That the presence of the respondent No. 2 was proved


on the spot. His presence coupled with the factum of
causing injury to witness (Noor Ahmad) is sufficient to
disentitle the respondent No. 2 from the relief, graced
by the lower court.

v) That the act, conduct and rule attributed to the


respondent No. 2 is falling within the preview of
facilitation, common intention and vicarious liability.

vi) That the observation of the learned lower court


regarding the ailment of respondent No. 2 is against the
opinion of Medical Board constituted by the orders of
the learned lower court.

vii) That the impugned order is patently illegal, unlawful


and without consideration of judicial mind.

viii) That the impugned order is perverse, capricious and


against the facts of the case.

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

DEPONENT

You might also like