Bail Application
353, 324, 394, 34 PPC
IN THE COURT OF ASJ V. AT KARACHI CENTRAL
Bail Application in CASE No. 45/2022
ALI RAZA @ UMAIR
Son of Abdul BARI,
Muslim, adult,
Presently confined in
CENTRAL JAIL,
Karachi. …………………………. APPLICANT/ACCUSED
VERSUS
The STATE ……………………………. RESPONDENT
FIR No. 131/13
U/S. 353, 324, 394,34 PPC.
P.S. Gulbahar.
BAIL APPLICATION U/S. 497 CRPC
On behalf of the Applicant, above named, it is respectfully submitted that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to enlarge him on Bail in consideration of the following facts and grounds:
BRIEF FACTS
As per an FIR, the complainant stated:
“He is posted at Madadgar 15, Nazimabad, Karachi, today, they were on patrolling duty alongwith other employee, PC, M. Hayat 12008, today during patrolling at 1800 hrs. they were coming from Lasbela Bridge, from one way, at front of habib patti a red color car was parked, at sitting on driving seated person was being to be snatched by two persons, with loaded pistol, ridded on motor cycle, on lalkar, to avoid arrest, with intention to kill, stared firing, my other above said employee on self defense, counter fired, due to counter fire one person, Slonel S/o. Pervez, who was being snatched, was injured, one accused was arrested and one succeeded to escape, and arrested accused was searched one pistol 30 bored with 3 loaded magazines, mobile nokia 101, cash of Rs. 280/- were recovered. Hence this case.
GROUNDS
1. That the Applicant is quite innocent and falsely implicated in this case and story in this case is false and fabricated by the complainant due to show efficiency into the eyes of high officials, and on non compliance of demanded illegal gratification.
2. That the proceedings has been stopped for want of evidence under section 249 Cr.P.C, for want / lack of evidence by Hon’ble Court VII th. JM Karachi Central, in connected Case No. 2606/2021, U/S. 13-d, A.O., hence the applicant is entitled for concession of bail. True copy of the said OREDR is annexed herewith and marked as annexure “A”
3. That That no incriminating article has been recovered from the applicant/accused and recovery is foisted one, the applicant/accused was arrested from bus stop waiting for his bus, then suddenly police came and put him in police mobile but due to non compliance of demanded illegal gratification..
4. That it is still to be seen as to which of the parties was aggressor.
5. That as per prosecution version, there was a exchange of ineffective firing between police party and accused persons except one person, Sonel S/o. Pervez, was injured by the P.C, M. HAYAT’s Fire.
6. That neither any one received bullet injury nor any scratch to any member of police party consist of PC M. Hayat and the complainant, nor any vehicle/motor cycle from both sides hit or damaged in alleged encounter.
7. That no empties recovered from place of incident. The alleged recovery was produced by the complainant in police station, which creates doubt and false implication cannot be ruled out. Hence, it is a fit case of further probe in the circumstances.
8. That no specific role has been assigned by the prosecution in the alleged police en-counter, but the alleged accused has been booked to show efficiency into the eyes of high officials. As per prosecution, the I.O. of the case, the non-arrested started firing, with intention, to kill the complainant.
9. That as per prosecution the applicant was arrested with pistol loaded with three live rounds, it is strange a person armed with pistol loaded with three live rounds he kept standing with no resistance, no repeating Fire by the applicant/accused, the circumstances motioned in FIR create doubt, and false implication cannot be ruled out. Hence, it is a fit case of further probe in the circumstances.
10. That the alleged search was made by the complainant himself, no one was said to any independent person to be witness. The alleged recovery was produced by the complainant in police station, So there is violation of mandatory provisions section 103 Cr.P.C.
11. That the all Mashirs of Arrest & Site Plan are not resident of locality/vicinity but the Police Officials, Subordinates while the place of occurrence is well-populated area of the locality and I.O has not said to any independent person to be witness while it was day time 1800 hrs., So there is violation of mandatory provisions section 103 Cr.P.C.
12. That the applicant is behind bar since his arrest more than nine months.
13. That investigation has been completed and the challan has been submitted in court already in this case and the applicant no more required for the purpose of investigation.
14. That the applicant is a peaceful law abiding citizen, he is behind the bar for the last more than nine months since his arrest, not a previous convicted nor a hardened criminal and neither he will temper with P.Ws nor will he abscond, as he is permanent resident of Karachi.
15. That if the accused/applicant is not granted bail he will not be able to defend him properly and he shall be suffered irreparable loss which cannot be measured monetarily and will be humiliated in the eyes of the society.
16. That the applicant/accused is ready to furnish solvent surety to the entire satisfaction of this Hon’ble Court.
17. That other ground may be argued at the time of hearing of this bail application.
PRAYER
It is, therefore, most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to enlarge him on Bail under the fact and circumstances mentioned above.
Prayed accordingly in the interest of Justice.
Karachi.
Dated: 01/07/13.
S M ZUBAIR
Advocate for the Applicant
Thursday, July 26, 2012
Bail Before Arrest in 302, 324, 353, 34 PPC
IN THE COURT OF DISTRICT & SESSION JUDGE AT KARACHI EAST
B.B.A. No. /2012
USMAN Ali Khan ………..……………… APPLICANT
VERSUS
The STATE ……………………… RESPONDENT
FIR No. 100/11
U/S. 302/324/353/186/34 PPC
P.S. Bahadurabad
THIS IS 2nd. BAIL
BEFORE APPLICATION
BAIL BEFORE ARREST APPLICATION
U/S. 498 CRPC
On behalf of the Applicant above named, it is respectfully submitted that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to enlarge him on bail in consideration of the following facts and grounds: -
BRIEF FACTS
As per an FIR, the Complainant, SI, Ghulam Asghar stated:
“I was patrolling along with PC Abdul Hameed, Driver, HC, Abdul Razzaq with Mobile Vehicle No. 4972 in the area, during patrolling at 1700 hrs, PC Irfanullah was informed on telephone that PC Taj Muhammad were on patrolling duty on Motor Cycle and when they came near to Kingri House Ameer Khusri Road, one Suzuki Car golden color coming from Gulshan, in which four boys were sitting. PC Taj Muhammad suspected and stop in order to make their personal search, one of the accused out of four fired on PC Taj Muhammad who became injured and accused escaped away in car No. ANM 215, thereafter complaint along with police employees stopped the car, the accused persons came out of the car and tried to escape from the place, on seeing such situation, police party made Arial firing; due to this police party apprehended the two accused and the other two succeeded to escape from place of wardat. Hence this report.”
True Copy of Certified FIR No.100/11 is annexed herewith and marked as Annexure “A/1-A”.
GROUNDS
1. That the Applicant is quite innocent and story in this case is false and fabricated by the complainant on instance of I.O of the case to humiliate and unjustified harassment the Applicant in the eyes of society, and there is apprehension to be arrested by the said I.O for the ulterior motives.
2. That the applicant belongs to respectable family and he was not even present in Karachi because he was in Peshawar at the time of alleged occurrence and then out of Pakistan i.e. in THAILAND and MALAYSIA, and it came to knowledge of the applicant, about this case, when he came in Karachi 0n 10-07-2012, that I.O of the case is humiliating and unjustified harassing the family members of the applicant and there is apprehension to be arrested by the said I.O for the ulterior motives.
True Copies of Passport, Visas and Air Ticket are annexed herewith for perusal of this Hon’ble Court and marked as annexure “A/2 to A/6” respectively.
3. That the applicant approached and tied to get Bail Before Arrest from Session Judge Karachi East which was transferred to ASJ IV Karachi East but police officials i.e. I.O of the case along with SHO Bahadarabad Karachi had surrounded the premises of the Court in order to cause his arrest due to there presence he could not appear before leaned ASJ IV Karachi East and application was not pressed to get interim bail before arrest. Then Applicant had to approach Hon’ble High Court of Sindh at Karachi for Protective Bail which was granted accordingly. So, the applicant has imminent apprehension to be arrested for the ulterior motives i.e. humiliating and unjustified harassing.
Copy of Order Of Protective Bail is annexed herewith and marked as Annexure “A/7”.
4. That other all accused have been granted bail already in this case; the main two Co-accused, Nisar Ahmed and Salman Yousuf, who were arrested on the spot has been granted bail by the Hon’ble High Court. The other main Co-accused, Zohaib Iqbal, has been granted bail before arrest in this Case by the Learned 4th ASJ Karachi East.
Photo Copies of Bail Order passed by Hon’ble High Court and IVth ASJ Karachi Central the Courts are annexed herewith for perusal of this Hon’ble Court and marked as Annexure “A/8 to A/9” respectively.
5. That the name of the applicant was, with malafide intention, disclosed by the Co-accused, arrested on spot, which is not admissible as per law, while the applicant he was in Peshawar at the time of occurrence and out of Pakistan i.e. in THAILAND and MALAYSIA at the time of alleged occurrence, the arrested accused are neighbor and they are school fellows having cold war/enmity/grudge against each others and have some jealousy with them due to this the arrested accused given the name of applicant to the police.
6. That no overt act or any specific role assigned to the applicant as per prosecution version.
7. That it is yet to be seen as to what was the intention and no motive had been alleged against the applicant.
8. That it is yet to be determined that who out of four hurt/fired the deceased. Hence, it is a fit case of further probe in the circumstances.
9. That there are all Police Officials/Sub-ordinates has been shown witnesses in the above matter, So there is violation of mandatory provisions section 103 Cr.P.C. while the place of occurrence is well-populated area of the locality, at the time of incident is a day time and I.O has not said to any independent person to make witness.
10. That the all Mashirs of Arrest & Site Plan are not resident of locality/vicinity but the Police Officials, Subordinates while incident took place in day time and I.O has not said to any independent person to make witness.
11. That crime weapon/incriminating article used by the alleged accused has not been recovered so far from the accused arrested on spot. So, it is fit case of further probe and grant of bail in the circumstances.
12. That from perusal of the FIR it is very clear that the prosecution has concocted/conceived a story. The empty cartridge fired by the complainant has not been shown/recovered in Mashirnama, it means no aerial fire has been fired which creates doubt, and hence it is a fit case of further probe.
13. That no prima facie case is made out under Section U/S. 302/324/353/186/34 PPC which has been registered under the instructions of TPO without taking into consideration and applying his mind on the contents of the complaint.
14. That investigation has been completed and the challan has been submitted in court already in this case and the applicant no more required for the purpose of investigation.
15. That the applicant is not a previous convicted nor a hardened criminal and neither he will temper with P.Ws nor he will abscond and he will join the prosecution for investigation, as he is permanent resident of Karachi.
16. That if the accused/applicant is not granted protective bail he will not be able to defend him properly and he shall be suffered irreparable loss which cannot be measured monetarily and will be humiliated in the eyes of the society.
17. That the applicant/accused is ready to furnish solvent surety to the entire satisfaction of this Hon’ble Court.
18. That other ground may be argued at the time of hearing of this bail application.
PRAYER
It is, therefore, most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to grant him Bail Before Arrest under the fact and circumstances mentioned above.
Prayed accordingly in the interest of Justice.
Karachi.
Dated: 24/07/12.
S M ZUBAIR
Advocate for the Applicant
AFFIDAVIT
I, USMAN Ali Khan Son of Muslim Ali Khan, Muslim, adult, R/o. Karachi, do hereby state as under: -
1. That I am The Applicant/Deponent of this affidavit and as such am fully conversant with the facts of the matter deposed herein.
2. That I have filed such Bail before Application before this but could not appear before Leaned Court, the accompanying application has been drafted and filed under my express instructions and the same may be treated as part and parcel of this affidavit, the contents of the accompanied application has not been reiterated for the sake of brevity.
3. That unless the accompanying application is not allowed I shall suffer irreparable loss, which cannot be measured monetarily and whatever stated above is true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief.
Karachi.
Dated: 24/07/12.
DEPONENT
CNIC #. _______________________
The Deponent identified by me.
S M ZUBAIR
(ADVOCATE)
Solemnly affirmed on oath before me at Karachi on this __ th day of _______ 2012, by the deponent above named who is identified by Mr. S M ZUBAIR, Advocate whom I know personally.
Comments
Post a Comment