IN THE LAHORE HIGH COURT, MULTAN BENCH,

MULTAN.

Crl.Misc. No._____________/2001

1. Irfan Qaiser (Muhammad Qaiser) S/o Muhammad Akram,

caste Bhatti, R/o 43/WB, Vehari.
2. Muhammad Amjad S/o Yasin, caste Bhatti, R/o 55/WB,
Vehari.
Petitioners
VERSUS
1. Muhammad Afzal S/o Muhammad Haneef, caste Arain, R/o Chak
No. 43/WB, Vehari.
2. Additional Sessions Judge, Vehari (Javed Iqbal Saif).
Respondents

Criminal Revision U/s 561-A Cr.P.C.

against the order dated 8.8.2001 passed
by Mr. Javed Iqbal Saif, learned
Additional Sessions Judge, Vehari, by
which the learned A.S.J. summoned the
petitioners in a complaint case titled
“M. Afzal Vs. M. Qaiser etc.” U/s-377
P.P.C. and 12-7/79 (EHO) No. VII.

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 brief facts giving rise to this petition are that the respondent
No. 1 alleged that on 23.10.2000 at 7:15 P.M. when he finished
his job at the shop and was returning to his home at Pir Murad,
while waiting for transport at Multan Octroi Post, two un-
 identified persons riding a black Honda Motorcycle stopped near
him and asked where he was going. He replied that he was going
to his home, on which they offered him to drop him at his home.
On his refusal, they forcibly boarded him on the motorcycle and
pointed a pistol on his back and warned that if he made a noise he
would be shot down. Both the accused by abducting in this way
took him to the room of a DERA. Three person were already
present there. They took liquor and forcibly poured into his
mouth also. One out of the two who abducted him committed
sodomy with him and again threatened not to make a noice.
When all they went to sleep, he got escape from there. He alleged
that on the next day i.e. on 24.10.2000, he submitted an
application to the S.H.O. concerned, but no action was taken,
then he submitted an application before the Incharge Monitoring
Team, Vehari on 26.10.2000, in which he named the accused
persons. This application was duly received and entrusted to the
concerned S.H.O. for inquiry and report. During the proceedings
initiated on application dated 26.10.2000, the complainant did not
appear before the concerned Investigation Officer. However, the
matter was thoroughly explored and the allegations levelled in
application were found baseless and incorrect. In this connection,
report No. 9 dated 5.11.2000 was also recorded. Copies of
application dated 24.10.2000 and 26.10.2000 along-with Rapat
dated 5.11.2000 are attached as Annexes “A, B & C”
respectively.

3. That the respondent No. 1/complainant did not try to be

medically examined intentionally and even when he was asked
for medical examination, he refused, but with malafide intention,
he submitted an application on 8.11.2000 and 10.11.2000 before
the Magistrate and Deputy Commissioner, Vehari respectively,
then the respondent No. 1 was medically examined on 11.11.2000
at 3.35 P.M. which was of course of no avail at this latest stage.
Copy of Medico-legal Certificate is Annex “D”.
4. That during the same period, the complainant/respondent
No. 1 filed a writ petition No. 1619/2000 before this Hon’ble
Court in which an order dated 3.11.2000 was passed and the writ
petition was disposed off. In compliance of this order, the
complainant/respondent No. 1 submitted an application before
the S.P. which was duly inquired/investigated by the panel of
officers (Complaint Authority) consisting upon D.S.P. (HQ),
D.S.P. (CIA), and D.S.P. (Legal). During this
inquiry/investigation, it was found that the allegations levelled
against the petitioners are incorrect and baseless, moreover it was
also found that all these allegations are levelled on the instigation
of one Muhammad Ashraf, who had a personal enmity with
petitioner No. 1 and others. This inquiry report was also
submitted in the office of Deputy Registrar (Judicial) of this
Hon’ble Court. The copies of writ petition, order, application of
complainant and inquiry report are attached as Annexes “E, F, G
& H” respectively.

5. That the petitioner now filed a private complaint against both the
petitioners which was entrusted to the Magistrate for the
proceeding U/s 202 Cr.P.C. The learned Magistrate after
recording the Surcery evidence submitted a repot U/s 202 Cr.P.C.
before the learned Trial Court/respondent No. 2, on which the
petitioners are summoned vide order dated 8.8.2001. Copies of
complaint, evidence, report of Magistrate and impugned order are
attached as Annexes “J, K, L & M” respectively.

6. That the order dated 8.8.2001 is impugned inter alia on the

following: -

GROUNDS

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

as well as against the law.
b) That the impugned order is passed without application
of judicial mind.
c) That the impugned order is against the justice, natural
justice and law of equity.
d) That during the proceedings before learned Judicial
Magistrate, the complainant/respondent No. 1
suppressed the real facts intentionally and did not
produce the evidence, which was against the
complainant or with conflict of the version of
complainant/respondent No. 1.
e) That the factum of concealment on the part of
complainant/respondent No. 1 proved that he did not
come with clean hands in the court of law, as such he is
not entitled for any relief.
f) That the essence of section 377 P.P.C and section 12
(EHO) VII is “penetration”, which is not available as
per medico-legal certificate and report of Chemical
Examiner. In the absence of this very fact no
punishment can be awarded on the ocular testimony of
a single witness, so the further proceedings in this
complaint case should be a futile exercise.
g) That during the inquiry/investigation, it was proved that
the allegations are false, frivolous and levelled against
the petitioners being the tool of one Muhammad Ashraf
who had personal enmity against the petitioner No. 1.
From this fact, it is crystal clear that the petitioners are
going to be involved with malafide intention and
ulterior motive.
h) That during surcery evidence the complainant/
respondent No. 1 improved the evidence and by any
means tried to involve the petitioners.
i) That the name of said Muhammad Ashraf S/o
Asmatullah is very much figured in the list of witness
and he also appeared as PW.1 during the Sursery
evidence. This fact also proved the connivance between
complainant party and said Muhammad Ashraf.
 j) That there is no corroborative evidence available on the
file for the ocular evidence of the
complainant/respondent No. 1 as PW.1, because the rest
of the evidence is having a base on the hear-say. Even
the report of Chemical Examiner is not in favour of
prosecution. Copy of report is Annex “N”.
k) That the impugned order if not set aside/quashed, will
be a cause of humiliation and harassment to the
petitioners.
l) That the impugned order has caused a great miscarriage
of justice to the petitioners.
Keeping in view the above-mentioned
facts, it is respectfully prayed that the impugned
order dated 8.8.2001 for the summoning of the
petitioners as accused may please be quashed/set
aside in the interest of justice.
Any other writ, 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 Crl. Misc. 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. Misc. No._____________/2001

Irfan Qaiser etc . Vs Muhammad Afzal etc.

AFFIDAVIT of: -
Irfan Qaiser (Muhammad Qaiser) S/o Muhammad
Akram, caste Bhatti, R/o 43/WB, Vehari.

I, the above named deponent do hereby

solemnly affirm and declare that the contents of
the above-titled Crl. Misc. 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 November 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.
 In re: C.M. No. _____________/2001
In
Crl. Misc. No._____________/2001

Irfan Qaiser etc . Vs Muhammad Afzal etc.

APPLICATION FOR DISPENSING WITH THE

FILING OF CERTIFIED COPIES OF ANNEXURES.
=========================================

Respectfully Sheweth: -
That certified copies of Annexures “ ”
are not available. However, uncertified/photo state copies of
the same have been annexed with the petition, which are true
copies of original documents.

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

court may please dispense with the filing of aforesaid copies
of documents.
APPLICANTS,

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.
 In re: C.M. No. ____________/2001
In
Crl.Misc. No._____________/2001

Irfan Qaiser etc . Vs Muhammad Afzal etc.

DISPENSATION APPLICATION.

AFFIDAVIT of: -
Irfan Qaiser (Muhammad Qaiser) S/o Muhammad
Akram, caste Bhatti, R/o 43/WB, 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 November 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.Misc. No._____________/2001

Irfan Qaiser etc. Vs Muhammad Afzal etc.

INDEX
S. No. NAME OF DOCUMENTS ANNEXES PAGES
1 Urgent Form
2 Stamp Paper
3 Criminal Misc.
4 Affidavit
5 Copy of application to S.H.O. A
6 Copy of application to the Incharge B
Army Monitoring Cell.
7 Copy of Rapat dated 5.11.2000. C
8 Copy of M.L.C. No. 1113/2000 D
9 Copy of Writ Petition No. 11619 E&F
along-with order dated 3.11.2000.
10 Copy of application to S.P. G
11 Copy of Report of District Complaint H
Committee.
12 Copy of complaint. J
13 Copies of interim order & evidence. K
14 Copy of report U/s 202 Cr.P.C. L
15 Copy of impugned order dt. 8.8.2001. M
16 Copy of report of Chemical Examiner. N
17 Dispensation Application.
18 Affidavit.
19 Application for stay of proceedings.
20 Affidavit.
21 Vakalatnama
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
IN THE LAHORE HIGH COURT, MULTAN BENCH,
MULTAN.
 In re: C.M. No. _____________/2001
In
Crl.Misc. No._____________/2001

Irfan Qaiser etc. Vs Muhammad Afzal etc.

Application for Stay of Proceedings.

Humbly Sheweth: -
1. That the contents of the main petition may be treated as part and
parcel of this application.

2. That the allegations levelled against the applicants are prima

facie baseless and having no footing as proved in different
inquiries/investigations.

3. That there is no independent evidence to corroborate the version

of the complainant.

4. That the independent evidence like medical evidence and

chemical report does not attract the commission of any offence.

5. That it is proved on the case that prosecution launched against

the applicants is based on the personal enmity and complainant is
used as a tool in this aspect.

6. That the learned Judicial Magistrate submitted a report under

section 202 Cr.P.C. without application of judicial mind.

7. That the learned trial court summoned the applicants without any
cogent and solid reason.

8. That the learned Judicial Magistrate has taken the cognizance of

this matter and recorded the statement of the complainant without
any lawful authority and jurisdiction.
9. That the impugned order has caused a continuous harassment and
humiliation to the applicants.

It is, therefore, respectfully prayed that further

proceeding in the case titled “Muhammad Afzal etc. Vs.
Muhammad Qaiser etc.” pending adjudication in the
court of Muhammad Iqbal Saif, learned Additional
Sessions Judge, Vehari, may please be stayed till the
final disposal of the main petition.

Any other relief which this Hon’ble Court deems

fit, may pleased be granted in the interest of justice.
Affidavit is attached.
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.
 In re: C.M. No. _____________/2001
In
Crl.Misc. No._____________/2001

Irfan Qaiser etc. Vs Muhammad Afzal etc.

STAY APPLICATION.

AFFIDAVIT of: -
Irfan Qaiser (Muhammad Qaiser) S/o Muhammad
Akram, caste Bhatti, R/o 43/WB, 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 November 2001 that the contents of this
affidavit are true & correct to the best of my
knowledge and belief.

DEPONENT