Full Judgment Text & Judicial Ruling

2003 M L D 1663

2003 M L D 1663

[Lahore]

Before Ijaz Ahmad Chaudhry, J

MAQBOOL AHMAD---Petitioner

Versus

THE STATE---Respondent

Criminal Miscellaneous No.2454-B of 2002, decided on 3rd October, 2002.

Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)---

----S.497---Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss.467/468/471/420/109-- Prevention of Corruption Act (II of 1947), S.5---Bail, grant of---Main accused who was custodian of the file in question and was also found responsible for alleged forgery, had been granted bail and case of accused was not distinguishable from the case of the main accused-- Accused was also entitled to same treatment---Accused was admitted to bail, in circumstances.

Iftikhar Ibrahim Qureshi and Mehr Khalil-ur-Rehman for petitioner.

Javed Iqbal for the State.

Date of hearing: 3rd October, 2002.

ORDER

Through this application under section 497, Cr.P.C. the petitioner seeks bail after arrest in case F.I.R. No.48 registered at Police Station A.C.E. Multan on 15-10-2001 for the, offence under section 467/468/471/420/109, P.P.C. read with section 5 of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947 on the complaint of Additional Registrar Multan Bench.

2. Brief facts of the case are that a Writ Petition No.6294 of was filed by the petitioner alongwith others. After the dismissal of the same Criminal Original No.263-W of 2001 was filed on 21-6-2001. The said criminal original was withdraw. However, the petitioner and others prepared a forged and fabricated order with a direction to. Provide a job to the petitioner in the said writ petition. This forgery was unearthed as Civil Miscellaneous, No. 1579 of 2001 and Civil Miscellaneous No. 1600 of 2001 was filed and an inquiry was conducted by the Additional Registrar Multan Bench on the basis of which case was registered against Muhammad Hanif Khan and Mushtaq Ahmad Anjum Senior Clerk of this Bench custodian of the file.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that Mushtaq Ahmad Anjum was the main accused who has been granted bail by this Court through Criminal Miscellaneous, No. 1457-B of 2002 and case of the petitioner is on better footing than the case of the co-accused and he is also entitled the same treatment. It is further contended-that there is evidence so far collected by the Investigating Officer to connect him with the commission of the crime and case of the petitioner is of further inquiry (sic) who was appointed through the order but subsequently his appointment order was withdrawn.

4. Learned counsel for the department has opposed the bail application on the ground that the petitioner is an official and he had also manoeuvred for getting of the stay order by making payment to the concerned official. It is further contended that the petitioner is not entitled to any relief.

5. Learned State counsel has also opposed the bail Application.

6. Arguments have been heard and record persued. As main accused Mushtaq Ahmad Anjum who was custodian of the file and was also found responsible for this forgery has been granted bail by this Court and the case of the petitioner is not distinguishable from the case A of said Mushtaq Ahmad Anjum, petitioner is also entitled the same treatment. He shall be released on bail subject to his furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs.1 lac with 2 sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Special Judge Anti-Corruption Multan.

H.B.T./M-1974/L Bail granted.

Related Legal Research & Directories

• Browse all judgments from Lahore High Court
• Search Pakistani statutes: Constitution of Pakistan 1973, PPC, CrPC, CPC & Family Laws
• Analyze this case with Al Wakeelo AI Legal Assistant