POST ARREST BAIL RIZWAN

IN THE COURT OF DISTRICT AND SESSION JUDGE,
LAHORE.
Muhammad Rizwan,
Son of Muhammad Mushtaq,
Resident of Lehna Singh,
Bedian Road Lahore,
…….Petitioner
VERSUS
The State
……Respondent
-------------------------------
F.I.R. No. 7726/23
Dated: 26.10.2023
Offences U/S: 302,234,353,186 PPC

13-2A-20-65, Punjab Arms
Oriance1965
Police Station: Shahdara, Lahore.
PETITION UNDER SECTION 497 & 498 OF

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CODE, 1898
FOR THE GRANT OF POST-ARREST
BAIL.
Respectfully Sheweth,
1- That the petitioners are respectable, law abiding and a

conscientious citizen with an unblemished record as true sincere
Citizen.
2. That the Petitioners are innocent and seek their post-arrest bail,
inter alia, on the following:
GROUNDS
A. That the arrest of Petitioner is due to misunderstanding,
the Petitioner has no concern with the Fir. That the
petitioners is absolutely innocent and have nothing to do
with the alleged commission of offence.
B. That from the facts and circumstances of the case
reasonable grounds do not exist to believe that the
Petitioner is guilty of the alleged crime. There is wide
scope of further enquiry in the matter. That the petitioners
are ready to furnish the Surety Bonds/Bail Bonds to the
entire satisfaction of this Honorable Court.
C. That, applicant / accused is neither previous convicted nor
hardened criminal.
D. That, the accused is no more required for investigation or
recovery; the final challan has been submitted.
E. That, the case of applicant/accused falls under proviso 3-A
of S/497(1) Cr.P.C.
F. That, nothing has been recovered from the possession of
the applicant / accused.
G. That, the complainant and I.O is the same person, and no
name of witness has been cited in F.I.R, which is sheer
violence of law.
H. That, the number of persons specified in F.I.R are 3 and the
number of accused names in final challan are 2 which
proves that the case is concocted and innocent person
have been involved in the case.
I. That, the accused was not arrested on the spot and
specifically the name of the present accused was added in
the F.I.R being the active the mala of the Police.
J. That, the full bench of the Supreme court has laid down
law in 1992 SCMR P. 1983 where in it was held that the
police can take the plea that they had fired in self defense
as it is the order of the day in police rank file they took
every incident as an encounter and keeping in view the law
laid down by SC, the present encounter is fake, concocted
and is of no legal value.
K. That, no independent witness is cited in the whole case to
support version of the police where as admittedly the
incident happened at 5:00 p.m in a thickly populated area.
L. That, the prosecution case is based on disclosure of
accused whereas per law laid down by supreme court that
the mere disclosure made by the accused does not
warranted conviction as held in 1977 SCMR p.292.
M. That there is last seen evidence and no incriminating
recoveries have been affected from the accused.
N. That after his arrest no identification parade was held, that
it is settled law that if assailants are not known to the
complainant party prior to the incident or at the time of
incident the identification parade is must as held in PLJ
1995 CR p.97 and 1997 SCMR p.971. That is the absence of
identification parade the matter requires further inquiry
U/S 497 Cr.P.C.
O. That, the only incarnating piece of evidence against the
accused is that he is arrested in case on the admission of
the other accused that accused during the police custody
he has admitted his guilt and pointed out the place of
incident. That such admission on the part of the accused is
inadmissible and is of no legal value as held in 1996 PCRLJ
p.1603 and 1997 SCMR p.292.
P. That, the complainant is police officer. That such piece of
evidence is inadmissible as held in 1939 AIR p.340.
Q. That accused is in custody since 07/11/2023 till now and
there is no progress in the case and the investigation is
completed.
R. That trial has not commenced so for and is likely to take
long to conclude.
S. There is no independent witness in whole case.
T. That no specific role is assigned to accused. As there are
plethora of rulings of the superior courts where in it is held
that in order to saddle an accused should be positively
connected with the alleged offence as held in SCMR p.332
and PLD 1996 Kar p.490.
U. That incident took place closer in main road at daytime,
but no body from the local vicinity supported the
prosecution. (PCRLJ 1972 p.567).
V. There is no allegation against accused except mere

presence, which in view of the enmity between the parties
calls for further enquiry into the guilt. (1996 PCRLJ 1422).
W. Where prosecution had not been able to establish Roughly

a prima facie case and had depend on further
investigation, the unfolding of evidence or other progress,
and reasonable ground don’t emerge for believing that
accused was guilty the case would fall under purview of
further inquiry. A case of further inquiry is one, where in
term of section 497 (1) Cr.P.C Reasonable Grounds does
not emerge for Believing that the accused is guilty, as
alleged or in other words, the prosecution has not been
able to establish what may roughly be termed as a prima
facie case and is found to depend on further investigation,
the unfolding of evidence or other progress in the case.
The accused there upon becomes entitiled to bail. (1990
PCRLJ 1085 Karachi).
X. The court has to graciously observe that even for purpose

of bail law is not to be stretched in favor of prosecution. If
any benefit of doubt arises it must go to the accused (1992
PLD SC 277) (PLD 1994 Lah 385)(1984 PCrLJ 2291-P.2293-
d).
Y. That Principal in nulity of CrPC: Particuler procedure for

doing anything or for tacking action prescribed by law has
to be strickly followed and adhered to, otherwise the thing
done or action taken would be a nullity in the eyes of law.
(p.1369-c)(2001 PCrLJ 1365).
Any other ground with the kind permission of this Hon’ble Court
at the time of arguments on the Petition.
IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE SUBMISSIONS, It is therefore most
respectfully prayed that accepting the instant Petition, the Petitioner
may graciously be admitted to Post-arrest bail till the final disposal of
the case.
Ad-interim bail till the decision of the instant Petition is also
prayed.
Respectfully presented by:
PETITIONER
through:
(Wasim Ahmed)
Advocate High Court
(Huzaifa Naeem Sahgel)

Advocate
26- The Mall, Lahore.
Dated: 13.03.2024.
CERTIFICATE: As per instructions of the clients, this is the first bail
petition moved before this Hon’ble court on behalf of
the Petitioner.

POST ARREST BAIL RIZWAN

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

POST ARREST BAIL RIZWAN

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

POST ARREST BAIL RIZWAN

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

IN THE COURT OF DISTRICT AND SESSION JUDGE,

F.I.R. No. 7726/23

Offences U/S: 302,234,353,186 PPC

Police Station: Shahdara, Lahore.

PETITION UNDER SECTION 497 & 498 OF

1- That the petitioners are respectable, law abiding and a

V. There is no allegation against accused except mere

W. Where prosecution had not been able to establish Roughly

X. The court has to graciously observe that even for purpose

Y. That Principal in nulity of CrPC: Particuler procedure for

(Huzaifa Naeem Sahgel)

You might also like