2012 Y L R 750 [Balochistan]
Before Muhammad Hashim Khan Kakar, J
NIZAM UD DIN ---Applicant
Versus
THE STATE---Respondent
Criminal Bail Application No.239 of 2011, decided on 8th September, 2011. (a) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) ---
----Ss. 497/498---Bail ---Assessment of evidence---Principle ---Deeper appreciation of evidence is
not warranted under the law at bail stage and only bird's eye view is to be made.
(b) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) ---
----S. 497---Penal Cod e (XLV of 1860), Ss.409/403/420/477- A/109/34---Prevention of
Corruption Act (II of 1947), S.5(2) ---Criminal breach of trust, dishonest misappropriation,
cheating, falsification of accounts, criminal misconduct ---Bail, refusal of ---Act of accused had
not only caused loss to the government exchequer, but he, with collusion of other accused, had also misappropriated huge quantity of sugar meant for poor and needy population of the District on a depreciated price--- Case was of mega -corruption in which government officials had joined
hands with private persons and had deprived the needy people of the Province of their legal rights ---Record did not suggest any mala fides or ill -will against the accused ---Admittedly,
official sugar was found in possession of accuse d---Co -accused had already been refused bail by
High Court on merits ---Offences mentioned in the F.I.R. fell within the prohibitory clause of
S.497(1), Cr.P.C.---Bail was declined to accused in circumstances.
Arther Victor for Applicant.
Rauf Atta, St anding Counsel and Sultan Mehmood Afridi, Law Officer F.I.A., for the State.
Date of hearing: 30th August, 2011. JUDGMENT
MUHAMMAD HASHIM KHAN KAKAR, J. ---Applicant, Nizam -ud-din son of Haji Ghulam
Haider, seeks post -arrest bail in case Crime No.13 of 2011, registered with Police Station, FIA,
Quetta, on 23- 6-2011, by complainant Muhammad Hashim, IP, under sections 409, 403, 420,
477-A read with sections 109 and 34 of the P.P.C. and section 5(2)of Act -II of 1947.
The relevant facts fo r disposal of the instant application appear to be that the FIA authorities had
received information to the effect that certain persons are involved in illegal purchase and selling
of imported sugar in open market and further transporting the same to Afgha nistan, which was
being supplied to the Utility Stores Corporation by the Trading Corporation of Pakistan, Karachi
on depreciated price. On 23- 6-2011, on receiving secret information, the FIA authorities raided a
Godown situated at Sirki Road, Quetta, wher e they found a truck, bearing Registration No.TKB -
027, parked and loaded with 700 bags (50 Kgs each) of imported sugar and on query, co -accused
Shams Mehmood alias Malang, being the Incharge of the Godown, informed that the truck is
ready for its delivery to one Raz Muhammad at Chaman. On further query and search, a huge quantity of imported sugar bags, which were provided by the TCP to USC for selling on depreciated rates, was recovered from the said truck and Godown. The allegation against the applicant i s that he is owner of the said Godown and the recovered imported sugar, which he,
allegedly, purchased, with the help and connivance of the officials of Trading Corporation of Pakistan and Utility Stores Corporation on depreciated rate, with a view to sell the same in open
market on higher rates as well as to transport the same to Afghanistan, thereby causing colossal losses to the State exchequer.
3. A bail application was moved by the applicant before the Special Judge, Anti Corruption,
Balochistan, Que tta, who after hearing the parties, rejected the same vide order dated 27 -8-2011,
hence this bail application.
4. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the available record with
their valuable assistance. Admittedly, deeper appreci ation is not warranted under the law at bail
stage and only bird's eye view is to be made. Tentatively, there is sufficient material available on
the record to believe that the applicant has committed the offence in question. It has been observed that the applicant is duly named in the F.I.R. During the course of inquiry held by the FIA, the applicant and his co- accused were found to be involved in the transaction of imported
sugar, which has been recovered from the Godown the applicant. The contention of the
applicant, being bona fide purchaser, has no legs to stand, as the record reveals that four cheques of Rs.1,40,00,000 have been sent in the name of Tahir Lashari, an employee of USC regarding the illegal purchase of sugar by the applicant. The stateme nts of Ikram Elahi and Amjad Ali, who
are employees of USC, Sibi, furnished a complete answer to the said contention of the applicant. The act of the applicant has not only caused loss to the government exchequer, but accused persons, with collusion of eac h others, have also misappropriated huge quantity of sugar, meant
for public and sent to Utility Stores Corporation; Sibi and its sale amongst the poor and needy population of District Sibi on depreciated price. To my mind, this is a textbook example of a case
of mega corruption, in which the officials of USC, Sibi have joined hands with the private persons and have deprived the needy people of the Province from their legal rights and caused huge loss to the government exchequer. The corruption has become a menace, which has to be
dealt with iron hands. There is nothing available on record to suggest that the case against the applicant is a product of any mala fide or ill -will. It is also an admitted position that the official
sugar supplied to USC, Sibi, w as found in possession of the applicant. Besides the fact that
prayer of bail of co -accused Naseem Umar Rind has been rejected by this court's order dated 29 -
8-2011 on merits From the available facts and circumstances of the case, prima facie, case exists
against the applicant, which does not entitle him to the concession of bail. Needless to mention
here that the offences mentioned in the F.I.R. fall within the prohibitory clause of section 497,
Cr.P.C
Thus, in view of above, application is hereby dismis sed. The above observations are purely of
tentative in nature, hence, the trial Court shall not get influenced from the instant order.
N.H.Q./113/Q Bail refused.This judgment is reproduced from a publicly available source for informational purposes and does not constitute legal advice. If you believe this listing contains an error,
let us know.