IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PAKISTAN

(APPELLATE JURISDICTION)

Cr. P.L.A No.______________/ 2021.

Gul Rehman S/O Hukam Khan R/O Yousaf Khel Mattani,

Peshawar, Now Confined in Judicial Lockup Nowshera.
……………………(Petitioner)

VERSUS

The State, Through Advocate General Khyber Pukhtunkhwa,

Peshawar.

. …………….………(Respondent)

CRIMINAL PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 185 (3) OF

THE CONSTITUTION OF THE ISLAMIC REPUBLIC
OF PAKISTAN, 1973, FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND ORDER DATED:
04.06.2021, OF THE HON,ABLE PESHAWAR HIGH
COURT, PESHAWAR PASSED IN CRIMINAL MISC:
BAIL PETITION NO.1665-P/2021.

==========================
Respectfully Sheweth:-

Law points falling for the determination by this August Court are:-

A. Whether the Hon,able Single Bench of the High Court

correctly appreciated the law points and facts available on

record?
B. Whether offences under section 15 Khyber Pakhtunkhwa

Arms Act 2013 with respect to the alleged recovery from the
petitioner are not bailable?

C. Whether the offence U/S 17 Arms Act 2013 Khyber

Pakhtunkhwa Arms Act 2013 is attracted in the case of the

petitioner, and the Hon,able Peshawar High Court while

refusing bail to the accused/petitioner has not totally

overlooked this important aspect of this case?

D. Whether the discretion of releasing an accused on bail

charged for an offence does not falls within the prohibitory

clause has wrongly been exercise by the Hon,able Peshawar

High Court while refusing bail to the accused/petitioner?

E. Whether non sealing of the alleged recovered arms and

ammunition on the spot does not create about the truthfulness

of the prosecution version?

F. Whether the mode and manner of the arrest of the

accused is extremely doubtful and against common human

conduct as he has neither attempted to accelerate the

motorcycle from the spot nor tried to reverse back the same
and went in front of raiding and volunteered his arrest from the

spot, hence the conscious knowledge of the accused/petitioner

with regard to the alleged arms and ammunition concealed in

the bags required further probe and evidence.?

G. Whether, association of private person despite their

availability at the place of occurrence as place of occurrence is a

public road, at the time of alleged recovery has rightly been

dispensed with by the police officials, and as such the provision

of the section 103 has not be violated by the recovery officer?

H. Whether, the accused / petitioner is quite innocent and

there is absolutely any evidence against him which can connect

him with the commission of offence as alleged against him?

I. Whether, the accused / petitioner has falsely been

implicated in the instant case on malafide intention and there is

no ocular or circumstantial evidence against him on record?

J. Whether there is prima facie any evidence on record

which could suggest that either the accused/petitioner is

previously convicted person or hardened, desperate or

dangerous criminal?

K. Whether the learned courts below did not taken into

consideration, the happening of natural events of the case and

available record on the case file and failed to tentatively assess

the points raised by the accused in its bail orders while applying

its judicious mind with deep thought at the time of disposal of

bail application of the accused/petitioner?

L. Whether in the light of all facts and circumstances of the

case the case of the accused/petitioner is call for further probe

and evidence and at present the case of the accused/petitioners

is that of further inquiry?

 M. Whether the earlier precedents of the superior courts on

the subject produced at the bar on behalf of the

accused/petitioner has wrongly been discarded by the Hon,able

high court while passing the impugned order?

Brief FACTS of the case are as under

1. That the accused / petitioner mentioned above has been arrested

in the case FIR No.201, dated: 03.05.2021. U/S 15/17 Arms Act, of
Police Station Jalozai, Nowshera, and was sent to Judicial Lockup
Nowshera.

2. That the accused/petitioner after his arrest filed his post arrest
bail application in the court of learned Judge Additional Session
Judge (I) Nowshera, for his release on bail but the same was not
considered and was turned down vide order dated:24.05.2021.

3. That thereafter the accused/petitioner approached to the

Hon,able Peshawar High Court Peshawar for his release on bail
the same was also met the same fate and was dismissed vide
order dated:04.06.2021.

4. That being dissatisfied with order dated:04.06.2021, passed by

the Hon,able Peshawar high Court Peshawar in Criminal Misc: B.A
No.1665P/2021, the accused/petitioner is filling the instant
Criminal Petition for Leave to Appeal before this August Court on
the following grounds inter-alia.

G R O U N D S:-

a. That the Hon,able Single Bench of the High Court failed to correctly
appreciated the law points and facts available on record.

b.
c. That offences u/s 15 Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Arms Act 2013, with
respect to the alleged recovered arms and ammunitions allegedly
recovered from the possession of the petitioner are bailable while
the provision of section 17 Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Arms Act 2013, are
not attracted in the case of the petitioner, hence on this score alone
the petitioner is entitled to be released on bail.

d. That even otherwise too, the offences u/s 15 and 17 Khyber

Pakhtunkhwa Arms Act 2013, are punishable for imprisonment of 07
years only and as such does not attract the prohibition contained in
section 497 Cr.P.C where the grant of bail is a rule and its refusal is
an exception and there is not exceptional circumstance available in
the case of the petitioner to refuse bail to the accused/petitioner.

e. That in the light of judgment of this august court, PLD 2017 SC 733
the discretion of releasing an accused on bail charged for an offence
does not falls within the prohibitory clause has not been properly
exercise by the Hon,able Peshawar High Court while refusing bail to
the accused/petitioner, hence the accused/petitioner is entitled to
be release on bail on this score alone.

f. That the mode and manner of the arrest of the accused is extremely
doubtful and against common human conduct as he has neither
attempted to flee away from the spot nor tried to accelerate the
motorcycle on seeing the raiding party and went in front of raiding
party and volunteered his arrest from the spot, hence the conscious
knowledge of the accused/petitioner with regard to the alleged arms
and ammunitions concealed in the bag required further probe and
evidence.

g. That, association of private person despite their availability at the

place of occurrence as the same is a busy road, at the time of alleged
recovery has wrongly been dispensed with by the police officials, and
as such violated the provision of section 103 Cr.P.C.

h. That, the accused / petitioner is quite innocent and there is

absolutely no evidence against him which can connect him with the
commission of offence as alleged against him.

i. That, the accused / petitioner has falsely been implicated in the

instant case on malafide intention and there is no ocular or
circumstantial evidence against him on record.
 j. That prima facie there is no evidence on record which could suggest
that either the accused/petitioner is previously convicted person or
hardened, desperate or dangerous criminal etc.

k. That the learned courts below did not taken into consideration, the
happening of natural events of the case and available record on the
case file and failed to tentatively assess the points raised by the
accused in its bail orders while applying its judicious mind with deep
thought at the time of disposal of bail application of the
accused/petitioner.

l. That in the light of all facts and circumstances of the case the case of
the accused/petitioner is call for further probe and evidence and at
present the case of the accused/petitioners is that of further inquiry.

m. That the earlier precedents of the superior courts on the subject

produced at the bar on behalf of the accused/petitioner has wrongly
been discarded by the Hon,able high court while passing the
impugned order.

n. That the accused/petitioner may urged other additional grounds if

any at the time of arguments with the prior permission of this August
Court.

It is therefore, respectfully prayed that leave to appeal

against the order and judgment dated:04.06.2021, passed by the
Hon,able Peshawar High Court, Peshawar in Cr: Misc: Bail
Petition No.1665-P/2021, may graciously be granted, and the
accused/petitioner may kindly be released on bail.

Drawn and Filed by

(Syed Rifaqat Hussain Shah)

Advocate on Record.
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Islamabad.

Malik Nasrum-Minallah
A.S.C Peshawar
Note.
Certified that no such like petition has earlier been filed by the petitioner
against the judgment and order impugned herein.

(Syed Rifaqat Hussain Shah)

Advocate on Record.
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Islamabad
 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PAKISTAN
(APPELLATE JURISDICTION)

Cr. P.L.A No.______________/ 2021.

Gul Rehman S/O Hukam Khan R/O Yousaf Khel Mattani,

Peshawar, Now Confined in Judicial Lockup Nowshera.
……………………(Petitioner)

VERSUS

The State, Through Advocate General Khyber Pukhtunkhwa,

Peshawar.

. …………….………(Respondent)

AFFDAVIT OF FACTS

I, Syed Rifaqat Hussain Shah Advocate on Record-on-record for the

petitioner, do hereby affirm and declare on oath as under:-

I. That averments of facts contained in the accompanying Cr.P.L.A

are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief.

II. That the said facts have been obtained on the perusal of record of
the case and information furnished by the petitioner.

Sworn at Islamabad on______day of_________,2021.

(Syed Rifaqat Hussain Shah)

Advocate on Record.
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Islamabad
 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PAKISTAN
(APPELLATE JURISDICTION)

Cr. P.L.A No.______________/ 2021.

Gul Rehman S/O Hukam Khan R/O Yousaf Khel Mattani,

Peshawar, Now Confined in Judicial Lockup Nowshera.
……………………(Petitioner)

VERSUS

The State, Through Advocate General Khyber Pukhtunkhwa,

Peshawar.

. …………….………(Respondent)

AFFDAVIT OF SERVICE

I Syed Rifaqat Hussain Shah, Advocate on record for the petitioner do

hereby affirm and declare on oath as under:-

That I did serve the respondents by notice through registered post

to the effect that I am filing Cr.P.L.A, against the Order and Judgment,
dated:04.06.2021, of the Hon,able Peshawar High Court, Peshawar
Passed in Cr: Misc: Bail Petition No.1165-P/2021, in the Supreme
Court of Pakistan.
Sworn at Islamabad on______day of_________,2021.

(Syed Rifaqat Hussain Shah)

Advocate on Record.
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Islamabad
 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PAKISTAN
(APPELLATE JURISDICTION)

Cr. P.L.A No.______________/ 2021.

Gul Rehman S/O Hukam Khan R/O Yousaf Khel Mattani,

Peshawar, Now Confined in Judicial Lockup Nowshera.
……………………(Petitioner)

VERSUS

The State, Through Advocate General Khyber Pukhtunkhwa,

Peshawar.

. …………….………(Respondent)

NOTICE
To
The State,
Through
Through Advocate General Khyber Pukhtunkhwa, Peshawar.

Please take notice that I am filing Cr.P.L.A, against the Order and
Judgment, dated:06.05.2019 of the Hon,able Peshawar High Court,
Peshawar Passed in Cr: Misc: Bail Petition No.888-P/2019, in the
Supreme Court of Pakistan.

(Syed Rifaqat Hussain Shah)

Advocate on Record.
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Islamabad.