IN THE
COURT OF Xth.
JM AT KARACHI CENTRAL
CASE No. 2315/2012
The STATE VS Muhammad
Taslim & others
FIR No. 85/12
WRITTEN ARGUMENTS FOR APPLICATION
U/S. 249-A CRPC
On behalf of the Complainant,
above named, it is respectfully submitted that this Hon’ble Court may be
pleased to dismiss Application U/S. 249-A Cr.P.C. in consideration of the
following grounds:
GROUNDS
1. The complainant has rightly lodged FIR against offence and illegal act committed
by the accused persons above named.
2. That if some cases pending before any court of law between one of the
P.Ws and accused namely Muhammad Tasleem then it does not concern to the complainant or with instant case.
3. That it is incorrect that complainant is the tenant of the
applicant/accused, the accused persons prepared a forged, fabricated Tenancy
Agreement. That accused namely Muhammad Tasleem filed a Rent Case bearing No.
453/2012 on forged, fabricated Tenancy Agreement which has been dismissed as
having no merit for consideration by competent Hon’ble 3rd. Rent
Controller Karachi Central.
True Copy of ORDER passed by Hon’ble 3rd. Rent Controller Karachi Central is
annexed herewith and marked as annexure “A”.
4. That it is incorrect being false, frivolous and baseless that due to enmity and
family disputes the accuseds were implicated but their own offence, if other
witnesses are interested or employee of the complainant then it is put to
strict proof and if so, as allegedly, the evidence cannot be discarded
summarily without giving opportunity to prosecution witnesses.
Relied
upon: 2000 P Cr. L J 752 Karachi, it
was HELD.
Criminal
Procedure Code (V of 1898)---
---S. 249-A & 417(2-A)---If
the complainant/prosecution is not given opportunity to prove the allegations leveled in FIR and it could not also be that there is no probability of
conviction of accused because the recovery Mashirs are allegedly interested person---Trial court acquitted the accused on the
ground that the recovery witnesses were interested witnesses---Validity---Such
recovery witnesses could not be intersted persons without they being examined
by the Trial Court and in the absence of any evidence to that effect---Trial
Court had no material/evidence to justify the order of acquittal and the same
had resulted in miscarriage of justice---Such order of acquittal was of
no legal effect and was set aside in circumstances. 2000 P Cr. L J 752 Karachi.
Relied upon: 2000 MLD
220, it was HELD
Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)---
---S. 249-A & 417---Trial Court had passed
order of acquittal under section S. 249-A, Cr.P.C---Such order was
passed summarily upon a denial of an opportunity to the prosecution to produce
its witnesses whose attendance had to be procured by the Trial Court by
adopting all the legal method---Thus non-appearance of the prosecution
witnesses cannot be said to be due to the laxity of complainant--- Without
application of independent mind to the facts of the case the
same was nullity in the eyes of law and was set aside---Case was remanded to the Trial Court to take up
the proceedings afresh. 2000 MLD 220
5. That is incorrect being false,
and baseless that prosecution did not produce the witnesses against the
applicant/accused to prove charge, while fact is that prosecution witnesses are
attending this Hon’ble Court since last date of hearing. Hence this application
is infractious.
6. That instant
case should be decided on merits as prosecution witnesses are available and
attending/appearing to prove charge before this
Hon’ble Court and probability exists the accused being convicted of the offence.
PRAYER
It is, therefore, most
respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to dismiss Application U/S. 249-A Cr.P.C., under
the facts and circumstances mentioned above.
Prayed
accordingly in the interest of Justice.
Karachi.
Dated: 26/07/13.
S M ZUBAIR
Advocate
for the Applicant
No comments:
Post a Comment