Al Wakeelo
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Petitioner: NAZIR AHMAD VS Respondent: THE STATEHonorable Justice Ch. Iftikhar HussainMuhammad Ghias-ul-Haq Sheikh,Ch. Muhammad Ashraf Sindhu,Sheikh Arshad Ali
2003 P Cr
2003 P Cr. L J 1870
[Lahore]
Before Ch. Iftikhar Hussain, J
NAZIR AHMAD---Petitioner
Versus
THE STATE---Respondent
Criminal Miscellaneous No.330/B of 2003, decided on 25th June, 2003.
Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)---
----S. 497(2)---Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss.420/467/468/471-- Prevention of Corruption Act (II of 1947), S.5(2)---Bail, grant of-- Further inquiry ---F.I.R. showed the allegation against accused that he alongwith his co-accused in connivance with concerned staff of Record Room of D.C. Office, had tampered record and entered the name of a wrong person therein---Said record was in the custody of the Officials of Record Room and date and time of such tampering with that record had not been mentioned in the F.I.R.---Alleged tampered record being in custody of Staff of Record Room, guilt of accused in the matter needed serious consideration---Case of accused required further inquiry into his guilt and was covered under subsection (2) of S.497, Cr.P.C.---Alleged abscondence of the accused, in circumstances, would not come in his way to the grant of bail to him---Accused was behind the bars for the last about eight months and was previous non-convict---Case for enlargement of bail of accused having been made out, he was admitted to bail.
Muhammad Ghias-ul-Haq Sheikh for Petitioner:
Sheikh Arshad Ali for the State.
Ch. Muhammad Ashraf Sindhu for the Complainant.
ORDER
Nazir Ahmad, the petitioner through the instant petition seeks post-arrest bail in case F.I.R. No.43, dated 22-6-2000, under sections 420/467/468/471, P.P.C. read with section 5(2), Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947, registered with Police Station Anti-Corruption Establishment, Multan.
2. Briefly the prosecution case as per F.I.R. is that Nazir Ahmad (petitioner) and Mst. Naziran Bibi in connivance with the Staff of Record Room, D.C. Office, Multan with mala fide intention have got entered the name of Sikandar in Mutations Nos.36 and 69 as the son of Meero deceased while Gauhar was his only legal heir.
3. It has been contended on his behalf that he has falsely been roped in; that the record, if at all, has been tampered with was in the Record Room and he could not have the access thereto and so the question of his having done so needs further inquiry into his guilt; that time and date of the occurrence is not mentioned in. the F.I.R.; that he had no knowledge of the case against him and he has not at all absconded; that his co accused Mazhar Abbas has been allowed bail by the Court of the learned Special Judge, Anti-Corruption, Multan on 13-6-2001 and his case is not worst than that of him; that the civil suit was filed by him and his co-accused Mst. Naziran Bibi and her brother Bashir claiming themselves to be the heirs of the deceased Meero and so owners of the land in dispute and in the same the stay order was issued in their favour; and that he is behind the bars for the last about 8 months and is previous non-convict.
4. Conversely, the learned State Counsel assisted by the learned counsel for the complainant has opposed the petition on the ground that he and his co-accused Mst. Naziran Bibi in connivance with the concerned staff of the Record Room have got entered the name of Sikandar in the aforesaid two mutations as the son of the deceased Meero while their predecessor-in-interest Gauhar was his only legal heir and so they have tried to get unlawful gain out of the same; and that he had remained absconder for quite some time.
5. I have carefully considered the submissions made from both the sides with the help of available record.
6. As mentioned above that the allegation against him and his co accused Mst. Naziran Bibi as per the F.I.R. is that they in connivance with the concerned staff of the Record Room D.C. Office, Multan have got entered the name of Sikandar as the son of the Meero deceased in aforesaid Mutations Nos.36 and 69. It has not been disputed by the prosecution's side that such record was in the official Record Room. The date and time of such tampering with that record has not been mentioned A in the F. I. R. The alleged tampered record when was in the custody of the staff of the Record Room, then the question of his guilt in the matter needs serious consideration. In view of this position, I am certain that his (petitioner) case certainly requires further inquiry into his guilt and the same therefore, is covered under subsection (2) of section 497, Cr.P.C. His case when has been found to be one of further inquiry and so in such circumstances his alleged abscondence will not come in his way to the grant of bail to him particularly when it is the contention from his side that he did not know the registration of the case against him. He is state to be behind the bars for the last about 8 months and previous non-convict. In these circumstances, I find that the case for his enlargement on bail has been made out. The petition, therefore, is accepted and he is admitted to bail provided he furnishes bail Bonds in the sum of Rs.1,00,000 with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court.
H.B.T./N-323/L Bail granted.