Al Wakeelo
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Petitioner: MUHAMMAD IDREES VS Respondent: StateHonorable Justice Fazal-e-Miran ChauhanMian Abdul Ghaffar,Ch. Saghir Ahmad, Standing counsel
2005 M L D 1833
2005 M L D 1833
[Lahore]
Before Fazal-e-Miran Chauhan, J
MUHAMMAD IDREES---Petitioner
Versus
THE STATE---Respondent
Crl. Mise No. 1578-B of 2005, decided on 27th June, 2005.
Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)---
----S. 497(2)---Customs Act (IV of 1969), Ss. 2(s), 16, 156(1)(89), 157(2) & 178---Import and Export (Control) Act (XXXIX of 1950), S. 3(3)---Bail, grant of---Further inquiry---Accused was simply driving vehicle which was hired by a firm for transportation of cloth owned by said firm---Employee of said firm, who was also accompanying the vehicle along with accused, who at the time of seizure, had admitted ownership of cloth to be of said firm which was lawfully purchased---Said employee had produced documents to satisfy Customs Authorities--- . Accused was only a carrier of said goods---Even otherwise offence charged in F.I.R. was punishable with maximum imprisonment of 6 years which did not fall within the prohibitory clause of S.497(1), Cr.P.C.---Case of accused was that of further inquiry and accused was no more required by Customs Authorities for any further interrogation---Accused was admitted to bail, in circumstances.
Mian Abdul Ghaffar for Petitioner.
Ch. Saghir Ahmad, Standing counsel for the State.
ORDER
FAZAL-E-MIRAN CHAUHAN, J.---This is a post-arrest bail moved by the petitioner in case F.I.R. No. 3 of 2005 dated 10-3-2005 under section 156 (1)(89) read with sections 2(S), 16,157(2) and 178 of the Customs Act, 1969, read with section 3(3) of Import and Export Control Act, 1950 P.S. I&P Branch, Collectorate of Sales Tax and Central Excise, Multan.
2. Briefly stated the case of prosecution as contained in the F.I.R. is that in the late hours of 10-3-2005, a truck trailer bearing Registration No.TLC-664 driven by the petitioner was intercepted near National Bank of Pakistan, Hussain Agahi Chowk, Multan by Anti-Smuggling Staff Collectorate of Customs, Multan. A container was loaded on the said trailer. Co-accused of the petitioner, namely Muhammad Shakeel was also present who was an employee of Subhani Traders, Faisal Town, Lahore, on search of the said container led to the recovery of 3045 Than measuring 1,60,900 yards cloth of foreign origin, CIF value of which was assessed at Rs.96,54,000. It is claimed that co-accused Muhammad Shakeel informed the Customs Authorities that the aforesaid cloth was lawfully imported from China through proper bill of entry and had been sold to Haji Nawaz Khan and Muhammad Amin Multan to whom the same was to be delivered. He also produced bill of entry but the stand taken by the co-accused Muhammad Shakeel did not favour the Customs officials. Thus, on the report of Muhammad Farooq Inspector, the aforesaid case was registered. Consequently, the petitioner and his co-accused Muhammad Shakeel were arrested.
3. It is contended by the learned counsel of the petitioner that petitioner was driver of Trailer bearing Registration No.TLC-664, Lassbaila. He was hired by Messrs Subhani Traders, Link Road, Model Town, Lahore for transportation of container containing cloth from Lahore to Multan against import document. The petitioner has no nexus with the cloth loaded at Lahore to be unloaded at Multan on the request of Messrs Subhani Traders. The co-accused, Muhammad Shakeel as employee of Messrs Subhani Traders also accompanied the vehicle to Multan. On the interception of vehicle said Muhammad Shakeel produced a copy of bill of entry and other import document and claimed the ownership of the cloth to be of a Messrs Subhani Traders is claiming of the ownership of the seized cloth. They are contesting the seizure and subsequent action of the Customs Authorities before different forums. Admittedly, the petitioner is neither importer nor beneficiary of the cloth nor he had pleaded so at any stage before Customs Authorities. The vehicle of the petitioner was hired as a public carrier, thus involvement of the petitioner in the case is without any legal basis. Nothing is to be recovered from the petitioner. He is not required for completion of investigation by the Customs Authorities he is behind the bar since 10-3-2005 for no fault of his without any progress in the trial. It is further argued that offence charged in the F.I.R. is punishable with maximum punishment of 6 years, as such it does not fall within the Prohibitory Clause of section 497 (1) Cr.P.C. and grant of bail in such cases is a rule while refusal is an exception. It is further pleaded the co-accused, who claims to be the owner has been granted bail by Special Judge Customs, vide his order dated 25-6-2005. Attested copy of the order is placed on record. Ch. Saghir Ahmad, learned Standing Counsel appeared on behalf of the respondent-State has vehemently opposed the application.
4. Admittedly, the petitioner was simply driving the vehicle which was hired by Messrs Subhani Traders for transportation of the cloth owned by them. An employee of the Messrs Subhani Traders was also accompanying the trailer along with the petitioner who at the time of seizure admitted the ownership of the cloth to be of Messrs Subhani Traders which was lawfully purchased by them. He produced the document to satisfy the Custom Authorities. In any case, the petitioner has nothing to do with the cloth loaded at Lahore for onward delivery to Multan by Messrs Subhani Traders. He was only a carrier of the said goods. Even otherwise, offence charged in the F.I.R. is punishable with Maximum imprisonment of 6 years and as such does not fall within the Prohibitory Clause of section 497(1) Cr.P.C. The case of the petitioner is admittedly is that of further inquiry. He is no more required by the Customs Authorities for any further interrogation. In this view of the matter, this petition is allowed. The petitioner is admitted to bail subject to his furnishing of bail bonds in the sum of Rs.50,000 with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of learned trial Court.
H.B.T./M-1178/L Bail granted.