Case Details

Citation(s)
2026 SLD 3422
Islamabad High Court
Criminal Misc. No. 659/2022  
Presented By: ARBAB MUHAMMAD TAHIR
          10.06.2022: Ch. Muhammad Nasir, Advocate for petitioner.  Mr. Qamar Inyat Raja, Advocate for respondent. Mr. Shahbaz Shah, State Counsel with Muhammad Ali, Inspector.

Ali Zaman, etc.  

VERSUS

  The State, etc.

Law: Pakistan Penal Code (PPC),1860

Section: 420,468,471

ORDER SHEET.                     Through the instant Crl. Misc, the petitioners are seeking bail before arrest in FIR No. 75/2022 dated 11.02.2022 under Section 420,468,471 PPC registered with police station Margallah, Islamabad.    2- As per the contents of the FIR, the petitioners have tempered registry No. 7738 and prepared a fake sketch of land and the same was presented before the Civil judge Islamabad and got decreed the suit in their favour.    The learned counsel for the petitioners contends that the registry in question was prepared in the year 1975 and on the basis of the said registry, the petitioners filed a suit in the year 2009 which was decreed in favour of the petitioners; that the said suit was contested by the complainant of the instant FIR and was arrayed as respondent No. 2; that the suit was decreed on 28.04.2021 and it was only when the petitioners filed execution of the said decree  which has attained finality,  the complainant came up with this story in connivance with the police officials that  a fake registry has been prepared by the petitioners; that the registry was very much exhibited before the Court of Civil Judge and the same was made part of the record. The PW in whose statement, the registry was exhibited was cross examined by the counsel for the complainant and no such assertions were ever made with regard to tempering of the registry; that it is all an afterthought to pressurize the petitioners to sit with the complainant and settle the dispute; that in case if any tempering has been made and the same was presented before the Court of competent jurisdiction, then at the utmost an offence could have been tried by the Court itself before which the said fake registry was presented rather than lodging an FIR; that under section 476 Cr.P.C read with section 195 Cr.P.C the court was empowered to lodge an FIR and try the offence itself.   While faithfully contesting the bail application, the learned counsel for the private respondent assisted by the learned State counsel  stated that the petitioners have committed forgery with the…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register