IN THE LAHORE HIGH COURT, MULTAN BENCH,

MULTAN.

Crl. Rev. No._____________/2001

1. Tufail Khan Ss/o Sikandar Khan, caste Rajput, R/o

2. Zafar Hussain Chak No. 72/W-B, Tehsil & District
Vehari.
Petitioners
VERSUS
The State. …...Respondent

CRIMINAL REVISION: - U/s 439 Cr.P.C. read

with Sec-435 Cr.P.C. against the order
dated 10.3.2001 passed by Syed Iqtidar-
ul-Hassan Bukhari the learned
Additional Sessions Judge, Vehari, by
which the petitioners were directed to
deposit Rs. 70,000/- each, as a penalty U/s
514 Cr.P.C. and attachment of standing
crops till the realization of penalty.

CLAIM IN REVISION: -
To set aside the impugned order and
release the standing crops of the
petitioners.

Respectfully Sheweth: -
1. That the names and addresses of the parties have correctly been
given for the purpose of their summons and citations.

2. That the case F.I.R. No. 353/98 dated 29.8.98 was registered U/s
302/324/148/149 P.P.C. at Police Station City, Vehari, against
 Muhammad Irshad alias Billa and others. This Muhammad Irhsad
alias Billa was admitted to post-arrest bail by the court of Syed
Iqtidar-ul-Hassan Bukhari vide order dated 31.3.2000. This order
was subject to furnishing two sureties in the sum of Rs. 100,000/-
each. The petitioners stood sureties for the said accused in the
like amount. Copy of order is attached as Annex “A”.

3. That the complainant of the above-mentioned case filed a petition

for cancellation of bail for accused Muhammad Irshad alias Billa
on 1.5.2000. During the proceedings of this application the
accused Muhammad Irshad alias Billa was summoned by the
learned lower court, but he could not appear in the court.
Subsequently, notices were issued to the petitioners for the
production of accused Muhammad Irshad alias Billa. The
accused Muhammad Irshad alias Billa could not be produced in
the court, by the police or petitioners/sureties and the learned
lower court was pleased to award the penalty of Rs. 70,000/- to
each of the petitioners. Certified copy of application for
cancellation of bail and impugned order are appended as Annexes
“B & C”.

4. That the impugned order is liable to be set aside interalia on the

following: -

GROUNDS

a) That the impugned order is against the natural justice

and law of equity.

b) That the impugned order is against the facts of the case

and norms of justice.

c) That the impugned order is passed without application

of judicial discretion.

d) That the petitioners became sureties just on the

humanitarian basis and not for any monetary benefit.
e) That the production of the accused was beyond the
control of the petitioners, because he was not available
in the locality.

f) That the provisions of law were not agitated properly

by the court for the production of accused and the
learned lower court remains putting pressure upon the
petitioners for the production of accused persons.

g) That the learned lower court during the proceedings for

the cancellation of bail attached the standing crops of
the petitioners and committed gross illegality. No such
provision is available U/s 514 Cr.P.C. and the learned
trial court acted beyond the jurisdiction. Copies of
warrant of attachment and proceeding of Revenue
Department are Annexes “D & E”.

h) That the learned lower court acted arbitrarily and

exercised the jurisdiction beyond the limitations under
the law.

i) That the petitioners are poor persons and small land-

owners, and the penalty is void and harsh one.

j) That the impugned order caused a great miscarriage of

justice to the petitioners.

PRAYER: -

It is therefore, respectfully prayed that the

impugned order passed U/s 514 Cr.P.C. dated
10.3.2001 may please be set aside declaring the
same as illegal, unlawful, ultra vires and un-
warranted under the law.
 Any other order, direction or relief which
this Hon’ble Court deems fit, may please be
extended in the favour of petitioners to meet the
ends of justice.

Humble Petitioners,

Dated: ___________

Through: -
Hammad Afzal Bajwa, Sheikh Muhammad Faheem,
Advocate High Court, Advocate High Court,
28-District Courts, Multan. 28-District Courts, Multan.
C.C. No. 20959 C.C. No. 20176

CERTIFICATE: -
Certified as per instructions of the client,
that this is the first Revision Petition on the
subject matter. No such petition has earlier
been filed before this Hon’ble Court.
Advocate
 IN THE LAHORE HIGH COURT, MULTAN BENCH,
MULTAN.

Crl. Rev. No._____________/2001

Tufail Khan etc. Vs. The State

AFFIDAVIT of: -
Tufail Khan S/o Sikandar Khan, caste Rajput, R/o Chak
No. 72/W-B, Tehsil & District Vehari.

I, the above named deponent do hereby

solemnly affirm and declare that the contents of
the above-mentioned petition are true and correct
to the best of my knowledge and belief and
nothing has been kept concealed thereto.

DEPONENT

Verification: -
Verified on oath at Multan, this _____ day
of April 2001 that the contents of this affidavit
are true & correct to the best of my knowledge
and belief.

DEPONENT
 IN THE LAHORE HIGH COURT, MULTAN BENCH,
MULTAN.

Crl. Rev. No._____________/2001

Tufail Khan etc. Vs. The State

Application U/s 561-A Cr.P.C.

Respectfully Sheweth: -
1. That the main Revision Petition may please be treated as part and
parcel of this application.
2. That during the proceedings under section 514 Cr.P.C. the
standing crops of the petitioners were attached. No such
provision U/s 514 Cr.P.C. or powers are available to the learned
trial court.
3. That the learned trial court acted arbitrarily and against the law.
4. That the production of the accused was beyond the control of the
applicant, and there was no fault on the part of the
applicants/petitioners.
5. That the standing crops are the only source of applicants to
maintain their families.
It is, therefore, prayed that operation of the order
of the attachment of the standing crops may please be
suspended till the final decision of this petition in hand.
Any other order, direction or relief which
this Hon’ble Court deems fit, may please be
extended in the favour of petitioners to meet the
ends of justice.
Humble Applicants
Dated: __________

Through: -
Hammad Afzal Bajwa, Sheikh Muhammad Faheem,
Advocate High Court, Advocate High Court,
28-District Courts, Multan. 28-District Courts, Multan.
C.C. No. 20959 C.C. No. 20176
 IN THE LAHORE HIGH COURT, MULTAN BENCH,
MULTAN.

Crl. Rev. No._____________/2001

Tufail Khan etc. Vs. The State

Application U/s 561-A Cr.P.C.

AFFIDAVIT of: -
Tufail Khan S/o Sikandar Khan, caste Rajput, R/o Chak
No. 72/W-B, Tehsil & District Vehari.

I, the above named deponent do hereby

solemnly affirm and declare that the contents of
the above-mentioned application are true and
correct to the best of my knowledge and belief
and nothing has been kept concealed thereto.

DEPONENT

Verification: -
Verified on oath at Multan, this _____ day
of April 2001 that the contents of this affidavit
are true & correct to the best of my knowledge
and belief.
DEPONENT
 IN THE LAHORE HIGH COURT, MULTAN BENCH,
MULTAN.

Crl. Rev. No._____________/2001

Tufail Khan etc. Vs. The State

APPLICATION FOR DISPENSING WITH THE

FILING OF CERTIFIED COPY OF ANNEXURE.
========================================

Respectfully Sheweth:-
That certified copy of Annexure “A” is not available.
However, uncertified/photo state copy of the same has been
annexed with the petition, which is true copy of the original
document.

It is, therefore, respectfully prayed that this Hon’ble

court may please dispense with the filing of aforesaid copy of
the document.
APPLICANT

Dated: __________

Through: -
Hammad Afzal Bajwa,
Advocate High Court,
28-District Courts, Multan.
C.C. No. 20959
Sheikh Muhammad Faheem,
Advocate High Court,
28-District Courts, Multan.
C.C. No. 20176
 IN THE LAHORE HIGH COURT, MULTAN BENCH,
MULTAN.

Crl. Rev. No._____________/2001

Tufail Khan etc. Vs. The State

DISPENSATION APPLICATION.

AFFIDAVIT of: -
Tufail Khan S/o Sikandar Khan, caste Rajput, R/o Chak
No. 72/W-B, Tehsil & District Vehari.

I, the above named deponent do hereby

solemnly affirm and declare that the contents of
the above-mentioned application are true and
correct to the best of my knowledge and belief
and nothing has been kept concealed thereto.

DEPONENT

Verification: -
Verified on oath at Multan, this _____ day
of April 2001 that the contents of this affidavit
are true & correct to the best of my knowledge
and belief.

DEPONENT
 IN THE LAHORE HIGH COURT, MULTAN BENCH,
MULTAN.

Crl. Rev. No._____________/2001

Tufail Khan etc. Vs. The State

INDEX

S. No. NAME OF DOCUMENTS ANNEXES PAGES

1 Urgent Form
2 Revision Petition
3 Affidavit
4 Copy of order dated 31.3.2000. A
5 Copy of application for cancellation B
of bail.
6 Copy of impugned order. C
7 Copy of Warrant of attachment. D
8 Copy of proceedings. E
9 Dispensation Application.
10 Affidavit.
11 Application U/s 561-A C.P.C.
12 Affidavit.
13 Vakalatnama
PETITIONERS
Dated: ____________

Through: -
Hammad Afzal Bajwa,
Advocate High Court,
28-District Courts, Multan.
C.C. No. 20959
Sheikh Muhammad Faheem,
Advocate High Court,
28-District Courts, Multan.
C.C. No. 20176