IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH AT KARACHI.
Crl. Acquittal Appeal No. / 2021.
A ……………………..……...……………………....Appellant.
V e r s u s.
1. B
2. ADDITIONAL
SESSIONS
JUDGE
KARACHI SOUTH.
3.
The STATE …………...…………..…….…….Respondents.
Criminal
Complaint
No……./2019.
U/s. 3 &
4 of Illegal Dispossession Act 2005.
P.S. Shahra-e-Faisal,
Karachi.
CRIMINAL ACQUITTAL APPEAL
UNDER SECTION 8 Of ILLEGAL DISSPOSSAION
ACT 2005.
Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with Judgment dated 20/01/2021, passed by learned IIIrd Additional District & Session Judge, Karachi east, in Illegal Dispossession Complaint No. 109 / 2019, being an outcome of a Complaint under Section 3 of Illegal Dispossession Act 2005, Whereby acquitting the respondents. That the appellant / applicant has come in criminal acquittal appeal before this Honorable Court with a prayer that this Honorable Court may be pleased to call for the R & P of aforesaid case, peruse the same and satisfy itself as of the legality and propriety of the impugned, and further after hearing the parties counsels, pleased to set-aside the impugned Judgment, on inter – alia on consideration of following among other facts and grounds: -
(Certified Copy of impunged Judgment
dated: 20/01/2021, is attached herewith and marked as annexure A).
FACTS.
That brief
facts of the Complainant / prosecution case are as under:-
1.
That
on 24/09/2019 accused Qaiser Nusrat Illegally occupied property of complainant
bearing Flat No. C1-C8, Rabia City, Ground Floor situated at Plot No. 118, KDA
Scheme No.36, Karachi. Hence this Appeal.
2.
The
Complainant filed the complaint before the Court of Hon’ble session Judge,
Karachi East and it was transferred to this court, on 27/06/2019, thereafter, necessary
documents as required U/S. 265-C Cr. P.C. were supplied to accused on receipts of
the same the formal charge against accused was framed to which accused pleaded
not guilty and claimed to be tried.
3. That concern Investigation officer of case after recording statements of complainant / the Appellant, Witness namely Subhan S/o. Khalid Shafiq, Contractor namely Faizan Qureshi S/o. Muhammad Farooq Qureshi, Contractor namely Muhammad Aslam S/o. Abdul Karim Estate Agent namely Ali and Tenant of Complainant namely Shakeel oral statement and Accused/ Respondent submitted his report dated: ____/11/2019 before the IIIrd ADJ Karachi (East) in which he clearly submitted that since 2006 the subject Flat is in possession of the Complainant which was purchased by the Complainant from accused and his sister Lamia by oral agreement. The subject property was mortgage before HBFC, there for mutually agreed between complainant and Accused and his sister the loan will be paid by complainant and same was paid by complainant and possession was already delivered to complainant in 2006. It is submitted that written sale agreement was executed by accused and his sister in the year 2017 and also give Special Power of Attorney to received NOC and document from HBFC to the complainant, the subject Flat was also rented out by Khalida Shaheen/ Complainant, the Contractor for Renovation work namely Faizan and Aslam also deposed that subject Flat is owned by the Complainant, the Estate Agent Ali and Tenant Shakeel also admitted the owner Ship of the Complainant. That the accused denied the sale of subject flat while in fact he is admitted the sale agreement and Execution of Power of Attorney in favor of the Complainant and payment of HBFC loan by the Complainant.
(Certified
copies of statement and I.O report are annexed as A/4 to A/9)
4.
That
for establishing charge against the accused and in order to prove the guilt of
accused, the Complainant Khalida Shaheen examined herself at Ex 3 and produced
receipts dated: 14/07/2009 as Ex/3-A, Tenancy Agreement dated: 02/06/2014
executed between complainant and shahzad Hussain Mughal as Ex/3-B, Tenancy
Agreement 10/12/2015, executed between complainant and Shakeel Ahmed as Ex/3-C,
Sale Agreement dated: 26/12/2017, as
Ex/3-D, Special Power of Attorney as Ex/3-E, receipts dated: 08/04/2019 of HBFC
as Ex/3-F, receipts of Application for closing of Account as Ex/3-G, renovation
Contract Agreement dated: 28/08/2019 at Ex/3-H, Application dated: 25/09/2019,
to manager of Law, HBFC as Ex/3-I and Application dated: 28/09/2019 to SHO
Shahra-e- Faisal as Ex/3-J Complainant Khalida Shaheen produced witnesses
namely Subhan Khalid as Ex/4, Faizan Khalid as Ex/5, Shaikh Muhammad Yousuf at
Ex/6, Burhan Khalid as Ex/7, learned for Complainant closed the side of
evidence of Complainant vide his statement dated; 10/03/2020, (Ex/9).
(Photocopies
of the Examination-in-Chief & Cross examination of the Appellant a/w
Deposition of Prosecution witness are annexed as A/ 10 & A/14
5. The accused was also examined under section 342 Cr.P.C through his statement recorded at Ex/10, in which he denied the allegation against him leveled in evidence and he alleged about P.W.S to be interested and further claimed his innocence the accused wanted to produce witnesses namely Shaikh Muzamil S/o. Muhammad Sharif, Abdul Basit Khoso and Sunny as defense witnesses and also wanted to be examined on Oath accordingly statement of accused on Oath under section 340 (ii) Cr. P.C was recorded as Ex/11 who produced HBFC payment receipts bearing No. 0179117 dated: 30/10/1998 as Ex-11/A, status of partner Account as Ex/11-B, Partner Collection / receipts detail as Ex 11/C, Affidavit dated: 25/06/2019 regarding cancellation of disputed Power of Attorney as Ex/11-D, News paper clip of Daily Amman dated:26/02/2019 as Ex/11-E, Tenancy Agreement of property dispute dated: 23/09/2019 at Ex/11/F, Union Maintenance Clearance Receipt dated: 23/09/2019 As Ex/11/G, Application dated: 27/09/2019 address to manager Accounts, HBFC, Civic Center Hassan Square Gulahan-e-Iqbal Karachi as Ex/11/H, TCS receipts of said letter with confirmation report as Ex/ 11/I, Complaint dated: 03/10/2019 against the Police Officer addressed to SSP Operation along with original TCS receipt and confirmation report as Ex/11/J, Power of Attorney dated: 24/09/2019, executed by his sister as Ex/11/K and Seven Photographs of property in dispute as Ex/11/L/1 to Ex/11/L-7 the evidence of defense witnesses namely Abdul Basit and Shaikh Muzamil Shareef was recorded to as Ex/12 & 13 respectively learned counsel for accused filed application for permission to allow witness of accuse namely Lamia Khalid thereafter both the counsels of for parties were heard and vide order dated: 06/10/2020 it was granted thereafter said witness did not appear and moved adjournment application on 28/10/2020 which was conditionally granted with direction that if on next date of hearing, witness did not appear the accused would pay Rs. 6000/- as fine, the witness, however did not appear and non 09/11/2020 counsel for accused filled adjournment application on which the case was fixed for final hearing.
(Certified Copies of Accused Statement
U/Section 342 & his cross a/w Deposition of Defense witnesses are attached
as A/ 15 to A/17)
6. That the evidence of the complainant / Appellant was recorded on 10/02/2020 in which the Complainant / Appellant defendant via documentary Evidence proved her case she stated in it that “ Accused and his sister Lamia Khalid informed me that their mother had taken loan from HBFC and now they were not able to pay the said loan, hence I should pay so I had paid Rs. 400000/- in cash to lamia Khalid and her brother against the sale consideration and further agreed to pay the remaining part payment of sale consideration by paying outstanding loan of HBFC. They handed over possession of subject Flat to me in the year 2006. I paid loan amount Rs. 63000/- to HBFC, I paid second installment of loan Rs. 94,516/- on 14/07/2019, I produced original receipt of payment dated ______07/2009 as Ex.3/A”. she further states that “since 2006 the said Flat remained in possession and I rented it out to different person. At first, I had rented out the Flat to one Shahzad in 2014, I produced Tenancy Agreement dated: 02/06/2014, executed between me and Shahzad Mughal as Ex.3/B, thereafter I rented out the Flat to one Shakeel I produced Tenancy Agreement dated 10/12/2015 executed betw3een me and Shakeel Ahmed as Ex.3/C”. she further states that “ Due to my relation with accused, hence 2006 verbal Sale Agreement was executed between me and the accused, later on sale Agreement dated: 26/12/2017 was executed in said sale agreement, Sale consideration of Rs. 400000/- and loan of HBFC paid by me were mentioned and remaining amount HBFC was also mentioned I Sale Agreement dated: 26/12/2017 as Ex.3/D”. the Complainant / Appellant further states that “ Lamia and Qaiser executed Special Power of Attorney dated: 26/12/2017 in my favor enabling me to obtained mortgaged HBFC I said Special Power of Attorney as Ex.3/E. HBFC launched a discount scheme through which I paid 230,000/- on 08/01/2019 and entire loan amount was paid I produced receipts dated: 08/04/2019, of HBFC as Ex.3/F. she further states that “ HBFC issued receipts dated: 19/08/2019 to me produced receipt of Application for closing of account as Ex.3/G since mother of accused and his sister has died, hence official of HBFC advice me to bring theme along with their CNICs that Original documents could be released I, thereafter, approached the accused frequently but they kept me and on false hopes for 2/3 months in the beginning of August, 2019 I bought the Flat acted from the tenant Shakeel and on 28/08/2019, I paid Rs. 300000/- to one Faizan for Renovation work as I was intending to reside Flat I produced in Renovation contract dated: 28/08/2019 as Ex,3/11, Faizan had to handover the Flat to me after it Renovation on 01/10/2019, but on the night of 23/09/2019 Qaiser along with some person broke open the Lock of my Flat and Occupied it.”
7.
That
the Appellant was cross examined by the Respondent/ Accused counsel at length
but the counsel for the Respondent / Accused failed to shatter down the varsity
of the Appellant and shaking his evidence.
8.
That
after recording of the evidence, elaborate arguments were addressed at the bar
& also submitted in writing on behalf of Appellant. It is pertinent to note
that the important pleas, as well as several other contentions raised at the
bar on behalf of the Appellant, were not properly examined and correctly
appraised in the light of the material on record. The evidence on record was
also miss-read and non-read, resulting in the faulty decision of in shape of Impugned
Judgment hence this Appeal on the following grounds.
Hence this acquittal appeal.
G R O U N D S.
1. That impugned Judgement annexure ‘A’
is not sustainable in law and on facts, in-as-much as the impugned judgment in
the circumstances merits to be set-aside.
2. That the impugned Judgement is the result of misreading of the evidence, in-as-much as the learned trial court has failed to appreciate that the appellant / complainant evidence.
3. That the appellant is a law-abiding citizen of Pakistan and a respectable citizen of Pakistan, enjoying good reputation filed Complaint / Application as per law against the Respondent No. 1, based on true facts and ample evidences brought on record of Court file but the same were no considered and slip short manner the impugned judgment has been passed by the Learned Trail Judge and he absolutely failed to put all the available evidence on the Scale of Justice and without putting / consideration of prosecution evidence the impugned judgement was passed which is absolutely capricious, perverse, arbitrary and liable to be set-aside.
4. That the learned trial Judge has
failed to appreciate that the complainant fully implicated the Respondent No.1.
That the Complainant has been examined by the learned trail Court and a length Cross
Examination has been conducted by the Respondent’s Counsel and she fully
establish the prosecution case.
5.
That the acquittal of Respondent No.1 is not justified by the evidence on
record and the findings and observations of the learned judge is totally based
on misreading of law, facts and the evidence on Record. All observations of the
Learned Trail Judge are based on presumption, surmises and speculation.
6.
That the entire case of the Prosecution is based on documentary evidence
and the motive of committing offence is also established, the learned trail
Judge failed to consider that ample documentary evidences brought before the
Court file but the same was ignored and the impugned judgment is the result of
the same.
7. That the Prosecution Witness No. 01 & 04, are Maternal nephew of accused and fully corroborate the version of complainant and also confirmed the dispossession of the complainant in the hands of the accused as well presence of accused at spot.
8.
That the Prosecution Witness No.
2, who had contract of Renovation of subject Flat with Complainant and
fully corroborated the version of the Complainant states that “Khalida Shaheen had given me subject Flat
for Renovation work and said Agreement was executed on 28/08/2019. I had done
floor ceiling work, polish, color, wooden door, cupboard electric work etc. when
I reached on Flat I found that Qaiser bhai was inside with some other persons
and he has closed the door. I knocked the door Qaiser disclosed that the said
Flat belonging to me, I replied that I was doing construction work and that
Khalida SHaheen had executed Agreement with me Qaiser Nusrat did not allow me
to continue work and asked me to leave”.
9.
That the Prosecution Witness No. 3,
who is eye witness as well as attesting witness of Sale Agreement and Special
Power of Attorney executed by the accused Qaiser Nusrat his sister Lamia with
Khalida Shaheen fully corroborated the version of the Complainant. He states
that “after purchasing subject Flat in 2006, my mother and other family members
initially resided in it
10. That the Respondent No. 1 in his Statement Plaint as well as in his
Examination in Chief remained failed to produce even a single proof in his
favor, whereas in his cross examination he
himself categorically admitted that the “ it is correct to
suggest that since first my mother in 1998 she did not pay any amount of
installment and became defaulter. It is correct to suggest that after I got the
status of partner account ( Ex.11/D) I and my sister did not pay any
installment”. He further admitted it is correct to suggest that in the year
2006 my brother in law gave the possession of Flat in dispute to Khalida
Shaheen. It is correct that it was agreed in the year of 2006that Khalida
Shaheen would pay the amount of installment.
11. He further admitted that “ it is
correct to suggest that since 2006 the Khalida Shaheen kept on giving the Flat
to different persons on rent. We always knew that Khalida Shaheen was living or
her sister’s was living there. It is correct to suggest that the power of
Attorney which I got cancelled through News Paper Daily Amman (Ex.11/E) was
signed by me. It is correct to suggest that Sale Agreement (Ex.3/F) bears my
signature. It is correct to suggest that the document at (Ex.3/F) bears the
clause 7 which wording as that the term and condition of this Agreement to Sale
have been read over and explained to the parties here to which they have
admitted as correct and as per their instruction and agreed to abide by the
same.”
12. It is correct to suggest that in sale
Agreement (Ex.3/F) now here it is mentioned that Khalida Shaheen was tenant. It
is correct to suggest that the Special Power of Attorney (Ex.3/G) was executed
in the year 2017. It is correct to suggest that it is mentioned in the Special
Power of Attorney (Ex.3/G) that Khalida Shaheen was empowered to received to
collect the original title documents of said property and NO-Objection
certificate from the office of concerned Department. It is correct to suggest that
since 2006 till 23/09/2019 I did not file Rent case against the complainant nor
I file suit for possession before any court to get possession of the Flat. It
is correct to suggest that as per partner collection / receipts details Ex.11/C
Khalida Shaheen paid Rs. 220,000/- to HBFC on 08/04/2019.
13. It is correct to suggest that Contractor Faizan had came at the Flat for Renovation. It is correct to suggest that the evidence of Faizan was recorded in this court. It is correct to suggest that I did not ask Faizan as if I had paid Sale Consideration of Rs.1,500,000/- to him. it is correct to suggest that the Affidavit (Ex.11/D) & News Paper Clip (Ex.3/E) are after the dispossession of complainant. It is correct to suggest that the Khalida Shaheen has filed a Civil Suit 2044/2019 against my sister and me for Specific Performance of Sale Agreement. It is correct to suggest that on 24/9/2019, contractor Faizan called up Khalida Shaheen to reach at the Flat as her Flat was occupied. It is correct to suggest that Khalida Shaheen had talked with for release of possession. It is correct to suggest that I have not produced any evidence to show that I was in possession of said Flat before 24/09/2019. It is correct to suggest that negotiation Khalida Shaheen filed Application at P.S Shahrah-e- Faisal on 28/09/2019.
14. That the Defense Witness No.1 namely Abdul Basit S/o. Muhammad Ali
Khoso, admitted in his Examination in Chief and during his Cross- Examination that
“on 18, September Qaiser came to me and
took me at the said Flat, Prior to 18 September Qaiser Nusrat was not residing
in the Flat”.
15. That the Defense Witness No.2 namely, Shaikh Muzammil Sharif S/o.
Muhammad Sharif himself admitted the commission of offence. He admitted that “ Qaiser had came to me. I advised him to
approach to HBFC for verification as to whether the property was transferred in
her name or not. Qaiser went there and informed me that the Flat was still in
the name of her mother and some was outstanding thereafter in the evening I and
Qaiser went to the Flat.
It is correct to suggest that I used
to visit the Flat in the year of 1998/99 when mother of Qaiser Nusrat was alive
but thereafter I did not visit it. Qaiser Nusrat was resided there since 1998
till 2002.
16. That the Learned Trail Judge failed to consider this aspect that the Respondent No.1 participated in commission of offence and specific role has been attributed by the prosecution in their evidence.
17. That the complainant has proved her case against the Respondent No.1 /
accused person by way of evidence produced by him.
18. That the Learned Trail Court has failed to look into the evidence
available on record and has failed to appreciate the evidence available on
record.
19. That the learned trail Court failed to consider the evidence of Prosecution Witnesses, who specifically define
the presence of accused at the place of incident with other persons.
20. That the Prosecution Witnesses has fully corroborated the version of
complainant, and the learned trail Court failed to look into matter and in a
slip short manner.
21. That the learned trial Court failed to observe that impendent witness
fully identified by accused with their specific role in commission of offence
and passed the impugned judgment and brush aside the impendent evidence against
the respondents, which is absolutely mockery of law.
22. That the injuries were fully corroborated / established by the
prosecution witnesses and which has not been considered by the learned trail Court
and passed the impugned judgment which is liable to be set-aside.
23.That I.O. of Case in his report fully support the version of prosecution,
which has not be considered by the learned trial Court at the time of passing
the impugned judgment, and passed the impugned judgment without any
substance. That there it is a matter of
fact and record that there are no material contradictions in the evidence of
prosecution witnesses.
24. That
the Learned Trial Court has passed impugned Judgement in hurry and without any
substance. That there is no question of any lack of evidence the version of
complainant are fully corroborated by the other prosecution witnesses and the
impugned judgement is a result of pin short manner. Therefore, the impugned
Judgement as a whole has been passed in vacuums so the same is not sustainable
in law and on facts.
25. That
the learned trail judge failed to appreciate that there is motive behind the
commission of offence by the Respondent and in presence of independent
witnesses the learned trail Court failed to put the same in judicial manner and
decided the same on technical manner.
26.That
the Respondents with active / specific role admitted the commission of incident and
wants to usurp the Property which he has
already been sold to the complainant as well as also they are trying to harass
the complainant, it is the prosecution who produced independent witnesses in
support of claim of complainant and in support of charge and the prosecution
put ample evidence for the conviction of respondents but it is the learned
trail judge who miserably failed to look the martial evidence as well as failed
to appreciate the evidence in shape of documentary proofs also.
27. That
it is also available on the face of file / case that there is direct evidence
against the Respondent and they were fully implicated by the complainant as
well as other prosecution witnesses, and there is gross misreading of evidence,
which amount to serious miscarriage of justice. That there is material
witnesses are available and the learned trail Court failed to appreciate and to
take their evidences on record. That the impugned Judgement is absolutely
capricious, perverse, arbitrary or foolish in nature and the same is liable to
set-aside.
28. That
there are so many legal defect in the impugned judgment and wrongly conclusion
drawn by the learned Trial Court. That it is a matter of fact and record that
in light of evidence recorded by the Learned Trial Court it has been fully
established beyond any shadow that the Respondent No. 1 committed offence as mentioned in Complaint,
Investigation Resport & Charge and on Oath taken by the complainant and
other prosecution witnesses and the respectable learned defence Counsel cross
examined the independent witnesses at length but fail to bring a single enmity
in between witness and respondents.
29. That the facts and circumstances, the role of Respondent have been attributed or assigned to the respondents, in the Complaint investigation Report, Charge, therefore, the impugned judgment is result of serious misreading of evidence and other prosecution are also remain for establishing the prosecution case, which were not recorded and if the evidences rightly put on the scale of justice then sentence could have been awarded to the Respondent No. 1.
30. That
there is motives for commission of offence in the hands of the Respondent No.1
and as well as there is clear cut evidences against the Respondent No.1 there
is no delay in filling complaint against the accused / Respondent No.1.
31. That
the motives of Respondent No.1 is very much clear and there is no bar if
different litigation are pending between the parties because each and every
has to been decided on its own merits not on presumptions and summaries.
32. That
the learned trail Court on one hand discuss genuineness of Sale Agreement and
Power of Attorney while on the other hand
the learned Trail Court decline
to interfere in validity or invalidity of any contract or any transaction of
civil nature.
33. That
admittedly the execution of sale Agreement of subject property and Sale
Consideration of subject property was not a question of present case/ Complaint,
and without applying its judicial mind the trail Court decided the same in
harry manner without adopt the proper application of law and if all the
evidences put on the scale of justice the Respondent No.1is absolutely
convicted as he has committed the offences / section with which he has been charged.
34. That
it is well settled principle of law that the Learned Court shall not facilitate
the either side and has to be administrated and decided the matter on its own
merits. It is submitted in present matter the learned trail court in slip short
manner but not look the gravity of offences, which is called serious
miss-carriage of justice on the part of learned trail Court, therefore, the
sentences may be granted.
35. That the charge of illegal Dispossession is absolutely proved against the Respondent No.1 and the learned trial court failed to appreciate this aspect of matter which is absolutely mockery of justice because the complainant and her other family members are facing serious combat situations due to criminal acts, deeds, of Respondent No.1 and they rioting in different Hon’ble Court to readdressal of her grievances and it is the Respondent No.1 whom illegally Dispossess, cheated, and extended threats of dire consequences, and caused financial, mental, physical torture to the appellant and her family members just to deliverance of justice the present appeal has been filed with the prayer to call issue notices to the Respondents, called R & P and after hearing of the present appeal, passed sentences in accordance with law so to repair the losses of the complainant, for this purpose the learned trial court has absolutely failed to delivered the justice to the appellant / applicant.
36. That the appellant has no enmity with Respondent
No.1 it is the respondent No.1 whom is committed offence against the appellant
who left nothing just to readdressal her grievances at competent forum and the
learned trial Court has failed to consider the same.
37. That
the appellant has no alternate just to file present criminal acquittal appeal
to readdress his grievance and the present appeal is well in time.
38. That
there are various other grounds the same shall be urged at the time of hearing
of this Crl. Acquittal Appeal with the permission of the Hon’ble Court.
Karachi. ADVOCATE
FOR APPELLANT.
Dated: -02-2021.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH AT KARACHI.
Crl. Acquittal Appeal No. / 2021.
A ………….....………….……………....Appellant.
V e r s u s.
B ..………………..…….…….Respondents.
A F F I
D A V I T.
I, ……………………………, Karachi, do
hereby state on solemn affirmation as under:-
1.
That I am the deponent of this affidavit and being
appellant in the above matter, as such I am fully conversant with the facts of
the case.
2.
That the accompanying Cr. Acquittal appeal has been
drafted and filed under my instructions and the contents of the same may be treated as
part and parcel of this affidavit.
3.
That I say that for the same brevity the grounds taken in
the accompanying appeal may please be treated as part and parcel of this
affidavit.
4.
That unless the accompanying application is granted the
appellant will suffer irreparable loss and seriously prejudice.
5.
That whatever stated above is true and correct to the best
of my knowledge and belief.
D E P O N E N T.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH AT KARACHI.
Crl. Acquittal Appeal No. / 2021.
A………….....………….……………....Appellant.
V e r s u s.
B..………………..…….…….Respondents.
APPLICATION UNDER RULE IX CHAPTER III-A,
VOLUME V OF SINDH HIGH COURT RULES.
It is respectfully
submitted on behalf of appellant named above that this Hon’ble Court may be
pleased to take up the above matter as an urgent motion and take up the above
matter in court / chamber on -02-2021, for hearing of
main criminal Appeal / above matter along with listed applications and the same
may be heard in the interest of justice.
The above prayer is made in the
interest of justice.
Karachi. ADVOCATE FOR
APPELLANT.
Dated: -02-2021.
IN THE HI GH COURT OF SINDH AT KARACHI.
Crl. Acquittal Appeal No. / 2021.
A………….....………….……………....Appellant.
V e r s u s.
B..………………..…….…….Respondents.
A F F I
D A V I T.
I, ………………………………..Karachi, do
hereby state on solemn affirmation as under:-
1.
That I am the deponent of this affidavit and being
appellant in the above matter, as such I am fully conversant with the facts of
the case.
2.
That the accompanying application for urgent hearing has been drafted and filed under my instructions and the contents of the same may be treated as
part and parcel of this affidavit.
3.
That after acquittal there is a apprehension of repeat of
offence as now Respondent No. 1, are
harassing me and there is apprehension of lives of my family also at the stake
at their hands.
4.
That I say that for the same brevity the grounds taken in
the accompanying appeal may please be treated as part and parcel of this
affidavit.
5.
That unless the accompanying application is granted the
appellant will suffer irreparable loss and seriously prejudice.
6.
That whatever stated above is true and correct to the best
of my knowledge and belief.
D E P O N E N T.
IN THE HI GH COURT OF SINDH AT KARACHI.
Crl. Acquittal Appeal No. / 2021.
A………….....………….……………....Appellant.
V e r s u s.
B ..………………..…….…….Respondents.
APPLICATION
FOR EXEMTION UNDER SECTION 561-A Cr. P.C.
It is respectfully
submitted on behalf of appellant named above that this Hon’ble Court may be
pleased to exempt the appellant from filing certified copy of Annexure __________
and also translation in English of all
Urdu version as the readable photo copy of the same are already annexed with main
criminal acquittal appeal.
The above prayer is made in the
interest of justice.
Karachi. ADVOCATE FOR
APPELLANT.
Dated: -02-2021.
IN THE HI GH COURT OF SINDH AT KARACHI.
Crl. Acquittal Appeal No. / 2021.
Khalida Shaheen………….....………….……………....Appellant.
V e r s u s.
Qaiser Nusrat & Others..………………..…….…….Respondents.
A F F I
D A V I T.
I, …………………….., Karachi, do
hereby state on solemn affirmation as under:-
1.
That I am the deponent of this affidavit and being appellant
in the above matter, as such I am fully conversant with the facts of the case.
2.
That the accompanying application for exemption has been
drafted and filed under my instructions and the contents of the same may be treated as
part and parcel of this affidavit.
3.
That I say that for the same brevity the grounds taken in
the accompanying application may please be treated as part and parcel of this
affidavit.
4.
That unless the accompanying application is granted the
appellant will suffer irreparable loss and seriously prejudice.
5.
That whatever stated above is true and correct to the best
of my knowledge and belief.
D E P O N E N T.
IN THE HI GH COURT OF SINDH AT KARACHI.
Crl. Acquittal Appeal No. / 2021.
A………….....………….……………....Appellant.
V e r s u s.
B..………………..…….…….Respondents.
CERTIFICATE.
It is most respectfully submits / certified that this is first Criminal Acquittal Appeal has been filed by the above named Appellant against the Respondents and there is no other appeal filed by the above named Appellant except above.
Karachi.
No comments:
Post a Comment
dont use bad word