IN THE COURT OF 1st. ASJ AT KARACHI WEST
Bail Application in CASE
No. 536/2013
SAJID @
Toora ………………… APPLICANT/ACCUSED
VERSUS
The STATE
……………………………. RESPONDENT
WRITTEN ARGUMENTS FOR 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:
“In
reference to FIR #. 131/13, U/S. 353, 324/34 PPC, on personal search of
arrested accused Sajid @ Toora S/o Gul Muhammad, recovered one Sten Gun along
with 25 alive rounds, on asking he could not produce Licence, on recovery of
weapon case was registered against applicant/accused U/S. 23-A (1) A.O.
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 applicant/accused and
other main Co-accuseds have been granted bail in main case, by this Hon’ble
Court in S.C. 534/2013, hence the applicant is entitled for concession of bail as a rule of consistency.
RELIED UPON: 2009 P.Cr.L.J 786, 2009
MLD 674.
---S. 497---West Pakistan Arms
Ordinance (XX of 1965), S.13 (d)---Bail grant of---Bail granted in main
offence cannot be with held in the case arising out of the same transaction. 2009 P.Cr.L.J 786.
---S. 497
& 103---West Pakistan Arms Ordinance (XX of 1965), S.13 (d)--- Bail grant
of---Crime was
offshoot of main cases registered against accused
under Ss.353/324/34, P.P.C., Wherein accused had been
enlarged on bail upon observing violation of
S. 103, Cr.P.C---Accused was admitted to
bail, in circumstances. 2009 MLD 674.
3.
That no incriminating article has been recovered from the alleged
accused/applicant and recovery is foisted one, the applicant/accused was
arrested from his house when he was sleeping at his home, but due to non
compliance of demanded illegal gratification.
4.
That the applicant was arrested in FIR #. 131/13, U/S. 353, 324/34 PPC,
by the complainant’s Police party and alleged that the accused persons started
firing after seeing police party who in self defense also started Firing but no one was injured in counter firing which makes all story highly
doubtful. Hence, it is a fit case of further probe in the
circumstances.
Relied
Upon:
2008 P Cr. L J 1371
---S.
497(2)---PPC, Ss. 302 & 324/34---Bail grant of---Further
inquiry---Ineffective
firing but no empty had been recovered from
the point assigned to accused in the site plan---Prima facie case of accused fell within the ambit of
further inquiry entitling him to the concession
of bail---Accused was released on bail, in
circumstances.
---S. 497(2)---Case
of accused would be covered by S. 497(2),
when he attributed in the FIR of ineffective firing.
2005 Cr L J 856.
---S. 497---13-d/324/353/34, Name disclosing by Co-Accused---No identification held--Case of ineffective firing. 2000 YLR 2217
5.
That no specific role has
been assigned by the prosecution in police en-counter, but the alleged accused has
been booked to show efficiency into the eyes of high officials.
6.
That as per prosecution, there was a heavy exchange of ineffective
firing between police party and accuse persons and as per prosecution version
the prosecution has fired 50 rounds but neither
any one received bullet injury nor any vehicle/property from both sides hit or
damaged and there is no empties
recovered or shown in FIR from place of incident. Hence this case is highly
doubtful and needs further inquiry.
7.
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. So
there is violation
of mandatory provisions section 103 Cr.P.C.
Relied Upon: 2009 MLD 674, 2004 YLR 201, PLD 2002 Kar. 113.
S. 497 &
103---West Pakistan Arms Ordinance (XX of 1965), S.13 (d)--- Bail grant of---Crime was offshoot of main cases registered
against accused under Ss.353/324/34, P.P.C., Wherein accused had been enlarged on bail upon observing violation
of S. 103, Cr.P.C---Accused was admitted
to bail, in circumstances. 2009 MLD 674.
No independent witnesses of recovery PLD 2002 Kar. 113
Requirements of S. 103 Cr.P.C not completed 2004 YLR 201.
8.
That the
present crime is not punishable with 10 years or R.I or more, hence it does
no fall within ambit of prohibitory clause of section 497 Cr.PC.
Relied Upon: 2001 P.CR.L.J 948
S. 497---West Pakistan Arms Ordinance (XX of
1965), S.13 (d)--- Bail grant of---Challan
Completed--- Not
falling within Prohibitory Clause. 2001 PCr.LJ 948.
9.
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.
Relied Upon: 2001 P.CR.L.J 948
S. 497---West Pakistan Arms Ordinance
(XX of 1965), S.13 (d)--- Bail grant of---Challan
Completed--- Not
falling within Prohibitory Clause. 2001 PCr.LJ 948.
10.
That the applicant is a peaceful law abiding citizen, 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.
11.
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.
12.
That the applicant/accused is ready
to furnish solvent surety to the entire satisfaction of this Hon’ble Court.
13.
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: 24/06/13.
S M ZUBAIR
Advocate
for the Applicant
