Lawyers Directory Listing
Chat with us free on WhatsApp — tell us your city and legal matter and our team connects you with the right lawyer. No form, no fee.
Criminal Miscellaneous Nos. 224‑B and 225‑M of 1980/BWP, decided do 26th April, 1980.
‑‑S. 497/498 and Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S. 409/420/468/470 read with Prevention of Corruption Act (11 of 1947), S. 5 (2)‑Bail Amount involved Rs. 24 lacs out of which nine lacs recovered from petitioner and remaining yet to be recovered‑Petitioner in Jail for more than a year‑Challan of eleven cases submitted in Court and remaining pending investigation ‑ for want of recovery‑Substantial amount having been recovered and trial likely to take considerable time, bail granted.
M. M. Bhatti for Petitioner.
Muhammad Jafar Hashmi for the Complainant.
G. M. Bodla for the State.
Bashir Ahmad Zafar petitioner has moved seventeen petitions for bail (Cr. Misc. Nos. 224, 226, 228, 230, 232, 234, 236, 238, 240, 242, 244, 246, 248, 249, 250, 251, and 252/B of 1980/BWP) in cases registered against him at different times between the period from 28th August, 1978 to 2nd July, 1979 on the allegations that while posted as Manager U. B. L., Liaquatpur Branch, he embezzled huge amounts. All these petitions were admitted to bearing by my learned brother Gul Muhammad Khan, J. on 22nd March, 1980. According to the learned State counsel, all the seventeen cases have been registered under sections 409, 420, 468, 471, P. P. C. and section 5 (2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1.947. All these petitions shall be disposed of by this order.
2. It is admitted that the petitioner was arrested on 26th November, 1978, released on bail by the Magistrate on 29th November, 1978 which was cancelled by the Sessions Judge on 16th December, 1978. Thereafter, he was admitted to interim bail on 20th December, 1978 by this Court. The learned counsel for the petitioner states at the Bar that as per hi instructions the petitioner was arrested on the next day, i.e., 21st December, 1978, and since then he is in jail. According to the learned counsel for the complainant and the State, the total amount involved in all these cases is approximately Rs 24,00,000 out of which an amount of Rs. 9,04,400 ha not been recovered so far while the remaining amount has already been recovered. It is further admitted by them that the petitioner is in jail ever since the date of his last arrest and the period of his detention comes to more than a year. They state that challans in eleven cases have already been submitted in the Court of Special Judge, Multan, and the remaining cases are pending investigation for want of recovery. Since a substantial amount has already been recovered the petitioner is. in jail for the last more than one year and trials will take considerable time to conclude, I, feel that a case for the enlargement of the petitioner on bail is made out. I therefore, admit him to bail in the sum of Rs. 25,000 with one surety in the like amount in each case to the satisfaction of Assistant Commissioner, Duty Magistrate, Liaquatpur.
Bail granted.
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
🔍 Find a Lawyer