ORDER SHEET
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, KARACHI
C. P. No.S-850/2011
_________________________________________________________________________
Order with signature of Judge
03.08.2011
Ms. Farkhunda Mangi, advocate for the petitioner.
-----------------------
As per bailiff report, it appears that the respondent Nos.1, 2, 7 and 8 has been duly served, however, no one is in attendance.
Office is directed to repeat notice on the unserved respondents for the next date. Adjourned to a date in office as suggested by the learned counsel to be fixed as per Roster. In the meanwhile, SHO, P.S. Gulshan-e-Iqbal, Karachi, is directed to provide protection to the petitioner as per law.
Interim order passed earlier to continue till next date.
JUDGE
ORDER SHEET
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, KARACHI
C.P. No.S-836/2011
_________________________________________________________________________
Order with signature of Judge
1. For Katcha Peshi.
2. For hearing of CMA No.3627/11.
3. For hearing of CMA No.3628/11.
03.08.2011
Mr. Sohail Hameed, advocate for the petitioner.
-----------------------
As per bailiff report, it appears that the respondents could not be served as the place was found locked.
Learned counsel for the petitioner states that the respondents are deliberately avoiding service, whereas order for issuance of writ of possession has already been issued and the matter is now fixed on 08.08.2011. Learned counsel prays that interim order may be passed otherwise purpose of filing of instant petition would be frustrated.
Office is directed to issue notice to the respondents through all modes including courier and pasting as well as through executing court i.e. VIIth Rent Controller, Karachi South, for 08.08.2011 as suggested by the learned counsel for petitioner to be fixed as per Roster. In the meanwhile, the petitioner may not be ejected from the subject premises till next date of hearing. However, it is clarified that if the petitioner does not proceed with the case on the next date, the interim order passed may be recalled.
JUDGE
Nadeem
ORDER SHEET
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, KARACHI
Crl. Acq. Appeal No.294/2011
_________________________________________________________________________
Order with signature of Judge
1. For orders on M.A. No.4992/11
2. For Katcha Peshi.
03.08.2011
Mr. Yousuf H. Khattak, advocate for the appellant.
Mr. S. Qamar-ul-Hassan, DAG.
-----------------------
Learned counsel for the appellant states that inspite of the fact that all the prosecution witnesses, including private witnesses, have implicated the accused persons in the instant crime, the learned trial Court while giving benefit of doubt has acquitted the accused persons under Section 265-H(1) Cr.P.C.
Learned DAG requests for time to prepare the case.
Office is directed to issue notice to the respondent No.1 for the next date to be served through concerned SHO.
To come up after two weeks to be fixed as per Roster.
JUDGE
Nadeem
ORDER SHEET
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, KARACHI
Crl. Acq. Appeal No.214/2011
_________________________________________________________________________
Order with signature of Judge
1. For orders on MA No.4161/11
2. For orders on MA No.3640/11
3. For Katcha Peshi.
03.08.2011
Mr. Shahzad Qureshi, advocate for the appellant.
-----------------------
It is inter-alia contended by the learned counsel for the appellant that the impugned order is based on misreading and non-reading of the evidence. Per learned counsel, inspite of the fact that the impugned construction of 5th and 6th floor was without approved plan. The learned trial Court has acquitted the accused by introducing other grounds regarding his ownership, which was never in dispute. Learned counsel for the appellant has also referred to the evidence of the respondent recorded on 08-01-2011 wherein impugned construction has been admitted.
Let pre-admission notice be issued to the respondents as well as Advocate General Sindh through all modes including courier and pasting.
To come up after 2 weeks to be fixed as per Roster.
JUDGE
ORDER SHEET
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, KARACHI
Crl. Appeal No.187/2011
_________________________________________________________________________
Order with signature of Judge
03.08.2011
Mr. Sardar M. Ajaz Khan, advocate for respondent No.2.
- - - - - - -
None for the appellant nor any intimation received. Learned counsel for the respondent No.2 states that since interim order is operating against the respondent, whereas the appellant was granted bail by the trial Court, such bail may be cancelled and the interim order passed earlier may be recalled.
As an indulgence as a last chance the matter is being adjourned to a date in office, to be fixed as per Roster, however with the caution if nobody appears on the next date the interim order passed earlier may be recalled and appropriate directions may be issued to the learned trial Court in accordance with law.
JUDGE
Nadeem
ORDER SHEET
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, KARACHI
C. P. No.S-811/2011
_________________________________________________________________________
Order with signature of Judge
03.08.2011
Mr. Malik Naeem Iqbal, advocate for the petitioner.
-----------------------
On 25.07.2011, notice of CMA No.3535/11 was directed to be served on the alleged contemnors through Ist Senior Civil Judge, Hyderabad, however no compliance report is available. Learned counsel states that since inspite of restraining orders, the alleged contemnors are raising construction.
Office is directed to issue notice immediately to the alleged contemnors through Ist Senior Civil Judge, Hyderabad, who shall submit compliance report before the next date of hearing.
Let the matter to come up for hearing on 10.08.2011. Interim order passed earlier to continue till next date.
JUDGE
Nadeem
ORDER SHEET
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, KARACHI
Cr. Bail Application No.887/2011
_________________________________________________________________________
Order with signature of Judge
1.For orders on M.A.No.7376/11
2.For orders on office objection and reply of advocate at flag "A"
3.For orders on M.A.No.7377/11
4.For hearing
03.08.2011
Mr.S. Mehmood Alam Rizvi, advocate for the applicant alongwith applicant Khalid Masood.
-----------------------
1. Granted.
2. Learned counsel for the applicant while confronted as to maintainability of direct pre-arrest bail without approaching the Court of first instance submitted that though in view of the judgments of this Court as well of the Hon'ble Supreme Court as noted in compliance to office objection, this Court can grant direct pre-arrest bail in appropriate cases. However, he has stated that let instant bail application may be converted into protective bail. Order accordingly.
In view of above, the objection has become redundant.
3. Granted subject to all just exceptions.
4. It is inter-alia contended by the learned counsel for the applicant/accused that the applicant/accused is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the instant crime, whereas, he is a bonafide purchaser of 04 acres land from previous owner i.e. Mrs. Mah Para wife of Shakeel Sultan, the main accused in the instant case, who allegedly attempted to grab the entire land of the society i.e. Pak Ideal Cooperative Society by making fabricated documents and entries in the Revenue Department with the connivance of the government officials. Learned counsel further states that the applicant purchased the 04 acres land in the year 1997 through conveyance deed, whereas, during all these years no complaint, whatsoever, was received, however, in order to cause harassment and humiliation to the applicant, he has been falsely implicated in the instant crime with ulterior motive. Learned counsel further states that there is serious apprehension that the applicant may be arrested by the police, therefore, he has requested for 12 days protective bail as the applicant is willing to surrender before the learned trial Court alongwith all relevant documents and further to join investigation.
Be that as it may, without touching the merits of the case, the applicant is granted protective bail for 12 days subject to furnishing solvent surety in the sum of Rs.100,000/- (Rupees One Lac) with P.R. Bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Nazir of this Court.
Needless to mention that this order will seize to have effect on or before the expiry of 12 days or on the date when the applicant appears before the trial Court for seeking bail before arrest, which ever is earlier.
JUDGE
ORDER SHEET
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, KARACHI
C. P. No.S-864/2011
_________________________________________________________________________
Order with signature of Judge
1.For orders on C.M.A.No.3705/11
2.For orders on C.M.A. No.3706/11
3.For Katcha Peshi.
4.For orders on C.M.A. No.3707/11
03.08.2011
Mr. Ahmed Ali Ghumro, advocate for the petitioners a/w petitioners.
-----------------------
1. Granted.
2. Granted subject to all just exceptions.
3-4. It is inter-alia contended by the learned counsel for the petitioners, who are also present in Court. Petitioner No.1 being sui juris has entered into a valid contract of marriage with petitioner No.2 out of her own free-will and without any pressure or coercion from any corner, which has antagonized the parents of petitioner No.1, who are causing harassment and have also declared the petitioners as Karo Kari. Learned counsel further states that the police is not providing protection on the contrary they are making attempt to arrest the petitioners though no FIR has been registered against the petitioners as per their knowledge.
Let notice be issued to the respondents as well as Advocate General Sindh for 15.08.2011 to be fixed as per Roster. In the meanwhile, respondents are directed not to cause any harassment to the petitioners, whereas concerned SHO, P.S. Ghora Bari i.e. respondent No.3 is directed to provide protection to the petitioners as per law.
JUDGE
ORDER SHEET
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, KARACHI
Crl. Bail Application No.873/2011
_________________________________________________________________________
Order with signature of Judge
1.For orders on M.A.No.7361/11
2.For orders on M.A.No.7362/11
3.For orders on M.A.No.7310/11.
4.For hearing.
03.08.2011
Ms. Maria holding brief for Syed Shafqat Ali Shah, advocate for the applicant.
-----------------------
1. Granted.
2. Through listed application, the father of both the accused persons have requested for withdrawal of the instant bail application as according to him they have engaged another counsel and have also filed fresh bail application through him hence they do not want to proceed with the instant bail application on account of some dispute with the previous counsel i.e. M/s. Masoomi Law Associates.
To this submission, learned counsel holding brief for Syed Shafqat Ali Shah, submits that they have no objection to such withdrawal of bail application.
In support of the contention, both the applicants have produced their original CNICs as well as CNICs of accused persons, copies of such CNICs are taken on record.
In view of such statement and no objection of the learned counsel, instant bail application is allowed to be withdrawn. Accordingly, instant bail application is dismissed as withdrawn alongwith listed application.
JUDGE
ORDER SHEET
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, KARACHI
C. P. No.S-873/2011
_________________________________________________________________________
Order with signature of Judge
1. For orders on C.M.A.No.3645/11
2. For Katcha Peshi.
03.08.2011
Mr. Qadir Hussain Khan, advocate for the petitioner.
-----------------------
1. Granted.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the husband of the petitioner is missing since last 2-3 years, who was allegedly required in some crime by the P.S. Ghotki, whereas the police is causing harassment to the petitioner, who does not know the where-abouts of her husband.
Issue notice to the respondents as well as Advocate General Sindh for 11.08.2011. Respondents/police officials are directed to act strictly in accordance with law.
JUDGE
ORDER SHEET
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, KARACHI
Crl. Misc. Application No.86/2011
_________________________________________________________________________
Order with signature of Judge
03.08.2011
On 19.04.2011, the counsel for the applicant was directed to assist the Court on maintainability of the instant case, however neither the applicant is present nor any intimation received.
In the interest of justice, the matter is being adjourned with the caution if nobody appears on the next date, appropriate orders may be passed.
JUDGE