IN THE LAHORE HIGH COURT, MULTAN BENCH,

MULTAN.

Crl. Misc. No. _____________B/2003

Muhammad Arshad S/o Lal Din, caste Rajput, R/o Mohallah Islam
Abad, Mian Channun, District Khanewal.

……PETITIONER

VERSUS
The State. ……RESPONDENT

APPLICATION FOR POST-ARREST BAIL

U/S 497/498 CR.P.C.

In Case: -
F.I.R. No. 367/2002 Dated: 21.9.2002
U/s: 364/34 P.P.C.
P.S. City, Mian Channun, District Khanewal.

Respectfully Sheweth: -

1. That an application for post-arrest bail has already been

declined by the learned A.S.J. Mian Channun. The attested
copy whereof is Annex “A”. However, this is the first
application submitted before this Hon’ble Court.

2. That the brief facts germane to the instant application are that
the afore-mentioned case was registered by P.S. City, Mian
Channun at the instant of Mst. Sakina wife of Wali
Muhammad, caste Mughal as against the petitioner and three
other accused persons on 21.9.02. According to her version,
in between the night of 8/9 of September, 2002, while she was
 sleeping along-with her other family members in her house
petitioner and others armed with weapons knocked at the door
and in response to that complainant’s husband Wali
Muhammad opened the door, the petitioner and others
dragged him out and kidnapped him. The copy of F.I.R. is
attached herewith as Annex “B”.

3. That the instant F.I.R. is absolutely false, concocted and based on

malafides and has been lodged for extraneous purposes just to
wreck vengeance against the petitioner and others. Actually, no
such occurrence as narrated in the F.I.R. has ever been
commenced.

4. That the actual facts necessary for the rightful decision are that
Mst. Kausar Parveen daughter of the complainant being sui-juris
aged about 24/25 years contracted marriage with Muhammad
Saleem one of the accused narrated in the F.I.R. with her own
consent and sweet will and performed marital obligations at his
house being his legally wedded wife.

5. That this act of Mst. Kausar Parveen caused great annoyance in

the mind of complainant and her family and in order to wreck
vengeance they involved petitioner and his other family members
in false cases.

6. That a W.P. No. 6360/02 was filed by Mst. Kausar Parveen

against complainant, her husband Wali Muhammad and 4 others
wherein she requested the Hon’ble High Court to direct the
delinquents to abstain from harassing the petitioners. The copy
whereof is Annex “C”.

7. That in order to nullify the marriage contract in between Mst.

Kausar Parveen and Muhammad Saleem, the complainant party
managed to procure a fictitious and forged Nikah Nama showing
therein that Mst. Kausar Parveen is wedded with one Muhammad
Amin S/o Muhammad Sadiq. This Nikah Nama being forged was
challenged by Mst. Kausar Parveen through a suit for jectitation
of marriage, which is pending disposal in the learned Family
Judge, Multan. (Copy of plaint is
Annex “D”).

8. That the petitioner is entitled for the grant of post-arrest bail

because of the following among other: -
 GROUNDS

a) That there is an unexplained delay of 13 days in lodging

the F.I.R.

b) That the petitioner remained in the physical custody of

police for a maximum period, but without any recovery of
abductee and crime weapon.

c) That no eye-witness has been mentioned in F.I.R. rather

the respectables of the vicinity being produced as
prosecution witnesses denied this occurrence in their
affidavits submitted before the learned trial court. Attested
copies whereof are Annex “E & E/1.”

9. That the learned trial court inspite of all these fabrications &
weaknesses of prosecution case, has erroneously declined to
grant bail to the petitioner.

10.That there is serious enmity and litigation exists in between the

parties and the facts explained by petitioner here-above bring the
petitioner’s case within the purview of further inquiry and
according to PLJ 1999 Cr.C. (Lah) 258 “even in a case falling
within prohibitory clause an accused is entitled to concession of
bail, if his case comes within the purview of further inquiry”.

In view of the above submissions, it is humbly

prayed that the petitioner may kindly be allowed post-
arrest bail till the final disposal of the case.
Humble Petitioner,
Dated: ________

Through: -
Mian Abdul Aziz Naseem,

Mian Haroon Aziz,

Advocates High Court,
123-District Courts,
Multan.

IN THE LAHORE HIGH COURT, MULTAN BENCH,

MULTAN.
 Crl. Misc. No. _____________B/2003

Muhammad Arshad Vs The State

INDEX
S. No. DESCRIPTION OF DOCUMENTS ANNEXES PAGES
1 Urgent Form
2 Bail Petition.
3 Copy of order of A.S.J. Mian Channu. A
4 Copy of F.I.R. along-with better copy. B & B/1
5 Certified copy of order. C
6 Certified copy of plaint. D
7 Certified copies of affidavits. E & E/1
8 Power of attorney.

PETITIONER,
Dated: __________

Through: -
Mian Abdul Aziz Naseem,

Mian Haroon Aziz,

Advocates High Court,
123-District Courts,
Multan.