IN THE LAHORE HIGH COURT, MULTAN BENCH,

MULTAN.

Crl. Misc. No._____________/T/2000

Ghulam Qadir S/o Allah Ditta, caste Ladhi Pathan, R/o Basti Pathan
Wala, Mouza Pir Sadat Tehsil & District Lodhran.
Petitioner

VERSUS

1. State
2. Sessions Judge, Lodhran.
3. Shabbir Ahmad S/o Allah Ditta.
4. Manzoor Ahmad S/o Allah Yar
5. Abdul Hafeez S/o Abdul Khaliq
6. Muhammad Aslam S/o Fazal Ahmad
7. Abid Hussain S/o Ata Muhammad
8. Sabir Hussain S/o Shah Muhammad
9. Muhammad Ajmal S/o Fazal Ahmad
10. Niaz Ahmad S/o Abdul Hameed
11. Fida Hussain S/o Sarfraz
All Otra by caste, Rs/o Kot Pir Sadat, Tehsil & District
Lodhran.
12. Allah Bakhsh alias Saddoo Malik S/o Ghulam
Muhammad, caste Khokhar, R/o Kotla Pir Sadat, Tehsil
& District Lodhran.
13. Allah Ditta S/o Pir Bakhsh, caste Otra, R/o near Pul Sodi
Wali, Tehsil & District Lodhran.
Respondents
 Petition U/s 435 Cr.P.C. read with Section
526 Cr.P.C. against the order dated
19.9.2000 passed by the respondent No. 2
on the application dated 19.9.20000 filed
by the petitioner.

F.I.R. No. 131/98 Dated 27.04.98

P.S. Qureshi Wala(Lodhran)U/s 16/7/79 I/L

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 above mentioned F.I.R. was lodged on the statement

of petitioner. He states that he is a cultivator. On the day of
occurrence, at 7/8 A.M. he along-with his family was
harvesting the wheat crop, when Haji Karam Hussain, Rana
Qadir Bukhsh and Rana Muhammad Bakhsh caste Otra
residents of same village came to his house. They called the
petitioner and his wife Mst. Rehmat Mai and told that last
night, Fiaz Hussain the son of petitioner had abducted Mst.
Rukhsana Mai the daughter of Rana Ashiq Hussain Otra of
same village. They directed to produce the same till evening.
The petitioner and his wife became confused due to this
situation. After some time, the petitioner along-with his wife
and son namely Mushtaq Ahmad left the house in search of
Fiaz Hussain and abductee. At about 9/10 A.M. when they
reached near the Adda Isranwan Mari, suddenly Niaz Ahmad
S/o Abdul Hafeez with pistol, Shabbir Ahmad S/o Allah Ditta
with Sota on one motor cycle, Manzoor Ahmad S/o Allah Yar
with Sota, Muhammad Aslam S/o Fazal Ahmad with Sota on
one motor cycle, Allah Bakhsh S/o Pir Bakhsh with Hatchet,
Qasim S/o Muhammad Hussain with Sota on one motor
cycle, Mujahid Hussain S/o Atta Muhammad with Sota, Sabir
Hussain S/o Shahid Khan empty handed, Sajjad S/o Fazal
 Ahmad with pump on cycle, Abdul Hafeez S/o Abdul Khaliq
with Sota, Saddo Malang with pistol, all Otra by caste
residents of Kotla Pir Sadat obstructed. Manzoor raised
Lalkara giving direction to abduct the wife of petitioner
because of abduction of his niece. On this Saddo Malang
pointed pistol on the petitioner’s head and threatened to fire
on resistance. Abid Hussain caught hold of petitioner.
Manzoor and Shabbir put Mst. Rehmat Mai forcibly on the
motor cycle. Niaz Ahmad was driving the motor cycle, when
Allah Bakhsh seated behind the wife of petitioner, and
remaining accused persons caught hold of Mushtaq Ahmad.
On the hue and cry, Muhammad Nawaz, Mehboob Ahmad
along-with other persons of locality attracted to the
occurrence; and got released the petitioner and his son when
the wife of petitioner was taken away by the Niaz Ahmad and
Allah Bakhsh. He further alleged that the accused persons had
abducted Mst. Rehmat Mai under the common intention for
the purpose of Zina. Hence, this F.I.R. Copy is Annex “A”
and better copy Annex “A/1”.

3. That even the statement of abductee, Mst. Rehmat Mai was

recorded U/s 164 Cr.P.C. in which she alleged the allegations
of gang rape, but the police challaned the accused person
under sections 337-F, 354-A, 148/149 P.P.C. The petitioner
submitted an application before the learned Judge, Anti-
terrorism Court No. 1 for taking the cognizance, but the same
was refused vide order dated 28.4.1999. it was further advised
that during the course of evidence, the matter of jurisdiction
can be decided. The copy of statement under section 164
Cr.P.C. is Annex “B”. Copy of order dated 28.4.99 is Annex
“C”.

4. That the investigation of this case was conducted by the

different agencies of police and ultimately challaned U/s 337-
F (iii), 354-A, 148/149 P.P.C. along-with Sec. 16/10 (4) 7/79
Islamic Law and submitted the challan before the learned
 Magistrate. The copy of Report U/s 173 Cr.P.C. dated 4.6.99
is Annex “D”.

5. That the learned Sessions Judge started the trial and recorded
the statement of Rehmat Mai as PW-1 on 7.8.99. In this
statement she again confirmed the allegations of gang rape,
on which the learned Sessions Judge transferred the case to
the Judge, Anti-terrorism Court, Multan with the observation
that the prima facie case falls within the ambit of Sec. 10
(4)/7/79 Islamic Law. The order of learned Sessions Judge
was assailed before the Hon’ble High Court through Crl.
Misc. No. 81/Q/99 and vide order dated 8.2.2000, the order of
learned Sessions Judge for the transfer of case/trial to the
court of Judge Anti-Terrorism Court, was set aside. However,
it was advised, because the Rehmat Mai was not cross-
examined, so that order of transfer is not sustainable in the
eyes of law, and there is no allegation of gang rape in the
statement recorded by Police U/s 161 Cr.P.C. on 28.4.98. This
order of Division Bench of Hon’ble High Court was
challenged before the Hon’ble Supreme Court through a Crl.
Petition No. 105-L of 2000 which was dismissed vide order
dated 7.4.2000 and the order of Hon’ble High Court was
upheld. Copy of In chief of Rehmat Mai along-with order
dated 7.8.99, order of Hon’ble High Court dated 8.2.2000,
copy of statement U/s 161 Cr.P.C. and order of Hon’ble
Supreme Court dated 7.4.20000 are Annexes “E, F, G & H”.

6. That the PW-1 was cross-examined on 7.8.2000 and the

allegations of gang rape were not denied by the Rehmat Mai.
Keeping in view the situation the petitioner submitted an
application on 19.9.2000 seeking the transfer of case to the
forum of Anti-terrorism Court, Multan. This application was
rejected on the same day and the trial was proceeded further.
The copy of application and order are Annexes “J & K”. This
order dated 19.9.20000 is impugned inter alia on the
following: -
 GROUNDS

a) That the impugned order is against the principles of

justice, natural justice and law of equity.

b) That the impugned order is against the law and facts of

the case.

c) That now the statement under section 164 Cr.P.C. and

evidence of adbuctee are in field, so much reliance
cannot be placed upon statement U/s 161 Cr.P.C.

d) That as per report U/s 173 Cr.P.C., the Investigation

Agency has charged the accused persons for an offence
U/s 10 (4) Prohibition (Enforcement of Hadood)
Ordinance, 1979 along-with other offence, then it was a
procedural defect to submit the challan before
incompetent forum.

e) That there is a competent court for the trial of offence

U/s 10 (4) Prohibition (Enforcement of Hadood)
Ordinance, 1979 under the Anti-terrorism Act, 1997.
No court other than a court established under Act 1997,
can proceed with the matter.

f) That in the peculiar circumstances, proceedings before

the learned Sessions Judge, Lodhran shall be corum-
non-judice.

g) That the impugned order has caused a great mis-

carriage of justice to the petitioner.

In view of the above submissions, it

is respectfully prayed that the impugned order
dated 19.2.2000, may please be set aside and case
F.I.R. No. 131/98 dated 27.4.98 P.S. Qureshi
Wala (Lodhran) may please be transferred to the
court of competent jurisdiction for trial.
 Any other direction, order or relief, which
this Hon’ble Court deems fit may graciously be
awarded in the interest of justice and equity.

Humble Petitioner,

Dated: ___________

(Ghulam Qadir)

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

CERTIFICATE: -

Certified as per instructions of the client,

that this is the first 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. Misc. No._____________/T/2000

Ghulam Qadir Versus State etc.

APPLICATION FOR STAY OF PROCEEDINGS

The applicant respectfully sheweth as under: -

1. That the contents of main petition shall be treated as integral part
of this application.
2. That challan of the case was prepared and submitted under
section 10 (4) Prohibition (Enforcement of Hadood) Ordinance,
1979, which is exclusively triable by the court established under
Anti-terrorism Act, 1997.
3. That the trial before the learned Sessions Judge, Lodhran is
“Corum-non-Judice”.
4. That this defect is not curable under section 537 Cr.P.C.
It is, therefore, respectfully prayed that keeping
in view the peculiar circumstances of the case in hand,
proceedings before learned Sessions Judge, Lodhran
may please be stayed till the final decision of main
petition.
Humble Applicant

Dated: __________
(Ghulam Qadir)

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

Crl. Misc. No._____________/T/2000

Ghulam Qadir Versus State etc.

STAY APPLICATION

AFFIDAVIT of: -
Ghulam Qadir S/o Allah Ditta, caste Ladhi Pathan, R/o
Basti Pathan Wala, Mouza Pir Sadat Tehsil & District
Lodhran.

I, the above named deponent do hereby

solemnly affirm and declare that the contents of
the above 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 October 2000 that the contents of this affidavit
are true and correct to the best of my knowledge
and belief.

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

Crl. Misc. No._____________/T/2000

Ghulam Qadir Versus State etc.

AFFIDAVIT of: -
Ghulam Qadir S/o Allah Ditta, caste Lodhi Pathan, R/o
Basti Pathan Wala, Mouza Pir Sadat Tehsil & District
Lodhran.

I, the above named deponent do hereby

solemnly affirm and declare that the contents of
the above 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 October 2000 that the contents of this affidavit
are true and correct to the best of my knowledge
and belief.

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

Crl. Misc. No._____________/T/2000

Ghulam Qadir Versus State 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.
PETITIONER

Dated: __________
(Ghulam Qadir)

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

Crl. Misc. No._____________/T/2000

Ghulam Qadir Versus State etc.

DISPENSATION APPLICATION

AFFIDAVIT of: -
Ghulam Qadir S/o Allah Ditta, caste Ladhi Pathan, R/o
Basti Pathan Wala, Mouza Pir Sadat Tehsil & District
Lodhran.

I, the above named deponent do hereby

solemnly affirm and declare that the contents of
the above 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 October 2000 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._____________/T/2000

Ghulam Qadir Versus State etc.

INDEX
S. No. NAME OF DOCUMENTS ANNEXES PAGES
1 Urgent Form __ __
2 Writ Petition. __ 1-11
3 Affidavit __ 13
4 Copy of F.I.R. & better copy. A & A/1 15-17
5 Copy of statement U/s 164 Cr.P.C. B 19-21
6 Copy of Order dated 28.4.99. C 23
7 Copy of Report U/s 173 Cr.P.C. D 25
8 Copy of In chief of Rehmat Mai. E 27-31
9 Copy of Order dated 7.8.99. F 33-41
10 Copy of Order dated 8.2.2000 & G & G/1 43-59
better copy.
11 Copy of statement U/s 161 Cr.P.C. H 61-69
(better copy) & order dated 7.4.2000.
12 Copy of application & order J&K 71-79
13 Dispensation Application. __ 81
14 Affidavit. __ 83
15 Application for Stay of Proceedings. __ 85
16 Affidavit __ 87
17 Vakalatnama __ 89
PETITIONER
Dated: ____________

Through: -
Sheikh Muhammad Faheem, Hamad Afzal Bajwa,
Advocate High Court, Advocate High Court,
C.C. No. 20176 C.C. No. 20959
28-District Courts, Multan.
 TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN

Certified that order dated 19.9.2000 passed by the learned

Sessions Judge Lodhran on an application filed by the complainant
Ghulam Qadir, seeking the transfer of trial “State vs Shabbir Ahmad
etc.” of F.I.R. No. 131/98 P.S. Qureshi Wala (Lodhran), is hereby
assailed before the Hon’ble High Court, Bench, Multan, through a
petition, which was entertained vide Diary No. dated
19.10.2000, and shall be fixed for hearing on 23.10.2000.

Yours sincerely,

Sh. Muhammad Faheem,

Advocate High Court,
Multan.