BAIL PERFORMA

Title as:                      Muahammad Abbas Vs State

Case FIR#             379/13 Dated:29.05.2013

Offence:              39-A Electricity Act 1910

P.S                          Raja Jang  District Kasur

(CERTIFICATE)

(as required vide judgmentdated 16.07.2001 Hon’ble Lahore High Court ,

In cr.Misc. No 6066-B-2001 Titled Hakeem Mumtaz Ahmad V/S The State)

1)	Whther the accused or any of his co-accused had earlier filed any bail petition before any such court or any other court & what was the result of the same.	No
A	Name of Court	Nil
B	Title of Application	Nil
C	Next Date of Hearing	Nil
D	Date of decision	Nil
2)	Whether the accused person seeking bail had filed any higher court and if so then whether the same is pending or stood decided.	No
3)	The Name and Address of the person on whose instruction the learned counsel supplies the information as required by this certificate.	Petitioner Himself.

Note:                   No Bail Application shall be entertained by the court which does not carry such a certificate & does not disclose the identity of the person on whose instructions such a certificate was given.

Signature of person

Signature of counsel

Objection by the jail authorities on Release Orders(Robkar).

ore'> � p n ��h h h font:7.0pt "Times New Roman"'>                   Samina, (Real Sisters of the Petitioner).

xi.                 Sheema, (Mother of the Petitioner).

xii.               Nazia ,(Wife of the Petitioner).

xiii.             Rabia W/O Yasir

xiv.             Aisha W/O Sunny, (Wives of Accused Brothers).

and all kith and kin of the petitioner are named in the FIR along with 2 more unknown persons.

The widest net is thrown and none of the family and kith and kin are spared.

3.      That the role attributed to the petitioner is that he inflicted a TOKA blow on the left leg of deceased Ishaque.

4.      That the medical account does not bear out injuries with a sharp edged weapon like TOKA on the leg of the deceased.

5.      That the inquiry report reveals one injury on the calf of right leg while in post mortem report, injury No.5 is a lacerated wound measuring 2cm*0.5cm present on front of (R) lower leg 11cm below knee. Injuries No. 6 and 7 on the leg are abrasions. Though the nature of injuries attracting certain penal provision is not stated, however the description positively suggests that these are simple in nature. That injury attributed to the petitioner is not particularly attributed to the petitioner.

6.      That the petitioner is behind the bars since 22.12.2012.

7.      That in Crl.Misc No. 2451-B-2013, His lordship Mr. Justice Shahid Hameed Dar of the Lahore High Court Lahore. While granting bail to Muhammad Tanvir and Abdul Qayyum observed on 08.05.2013 in Para No.6. Annex. A

PARA No.6  “According to the contents of the FIR, the alleged crime was committed by a mob consisting of 26 persons and in such a tumultuous situation. Its look pretty hard that the individual act of any of the rioters could be noticed by the complainant and other witnesses. The particular aspect of the case however, can be better taken care of by the learned trail court after recording of evidence of the parties during trial.”

8.      That his lordship Mr. Justice Muhammad Farrakh Irfan Khan of the Lahore High court Lahore, while granting bail to co-accused Arslam Ali and Yasir Ali observed on 30.07.2013 in of Cr.Misc No. 9084-B-2013 in Para No.5 Annexed. B, “the unfortunate accordance turned into melee. As regards the petitioners they are behind the bar since 22.12.2012 and 4.10.2013 repeatedly and in the facts and circumstances of the case cannot be incarcerated for in definite period of time. Their further detention would hardly serve any useful purpose for the prosecution. Co-accused of the petitioner with somewhat identical role have already been granted bail by the court. Mere reading of examination in chief of 9pws nowhere disentitled the petitioners and can be treated a valid ground to withhold the grant of bail. Investigation is complete. Challan has been submitted. Both the petitioners are real brothers. They are no more required by investigation agency for purpose of any further investigation.

For the afore going facts and reasons, aparts from the applicability of role of consistency petitioners case also falls with the ambit of provision 2 to section 497.

9.      (a). that the present petitioner is also brother of the accused who have been granted bail mentioned above. That on the body of deceased Muhammad Ishaque there are seven injuries in the post mortem report and out of these 3 are on the right leg one is lacerated wound and two are the abrasions, one injury is attributed on the right legal of sharp edged weapon to the petitioner. Firstly the injury is not supported by medical account and account of injuries as given in FIR leads to the observation dated 08.05.2013 in Para No. 6 of Annex A, by his lordship Mr. Justice Shahid Hameed Dar that crime was committed by mob consisting of 26 persons and in such a tumultuous situation, it looks pretty hard that the individual acts of any of the rioter could be notice by the complainant and other witnesses.

10. That the case against the petitioner is one of further inquiry.

11. That petitioner is not previous convict.

It is, therefore, respectfully prayed that the instant bail petition may kindly be accepted and petitioner may kindly be granted bail after arrest till the final disposal of the case.
                                                                                                                       

Petitioner:                                                Through Counsel