Find a Lawyer

Criminal Miscellaneous No. 1128/13 of 1984, heard on 28th October, 1984.

---S.497‑‑Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss. 409, 420, 468 & 471‑‑Prevention of Corruption Act (I1 of 1947), S.5‑‑Punjab Anti‑Corruption Rules, 1974, r.7‑‑Bail‑‑Total misappropriated amount only Rs.4,532‑‑Accused sent to judicial lock‑up and no recovery was to be made‑‑Finding of Departmental Inquiry Committee recorded in favour of accused‑ Permission; for registration of case against accused or their arrest, not obtained from concerned authorities‑‑Two accused out of three being public servants, their abscondence not apprehended‑--Accused, persons admitted to bail in circumstances.

Nisar Qutab and Muhammad Akram Sheikh for Petitioners.

Akhtar Masud for the State.

This order will dispose of the bail applications Crl. Misc. 1126/13/ 1984 filed by Khalid Hussain Contractor and Crl. Misc. 1128/13/1989 filed by Fida Hussain Sub‑Engineer and Khalid Iqbal S.D.O. Tubewell Sub‑Division No. II Scarp‑III, District Muzaffargarh in the case F.I.R. No. 18, dated 26‑7‑1984 under section 409/420/468/471, P.P.C. read with section 5 Act II of 1947 (Prevention of Corruption Act).

2. The allegations against the petitioners is that they prepared bogus record of repairs in respect of tubewell No. AP‑98 and mis appropriated a sum of Rs. 4,532 whereas in actual fact no repairs had been carried out of the said tube‑well. Bogus repairs were said to have been carried out through Khalid Hussain Contractor. An inspection of the so‑called repairs was got made through Irshad Ullah S.D.O. who found the allegations levelled in the F.I.R. as correct.

3. Bail is urged on the ground that the petitioners were not associated in the inquiry conducted by Irshad Ullah S.D.O. This. fact is admitted by the Investigating Officer. It is further stated that registration of the case against the petitioners is in violation of rule 7 of the Punjab Anti‑Corruption Rules, 1974 which provides that excepting the cases red‑handed capture prior approval of the Chief Secretary ox the Commissioner would be necessary for the registration of a case against Grade 17 officers but in the instant case, no such approval ox permission was obtained from the Chief Secretary or the Commissioner for the registration of case against Khalid Iqbal S.D.O. who is Grade‑17 officer nor was any permission obtained for his arrest from the Chief Secretary. It is next argued that a Departmental Inquiry Committee was constituted headed by Mr. Javid Muhammad Qureshi, Executive Engineer and two S.D.Os. who reported that the repairs and replacement of the tubewell in question were carried out. According to the learned counsel, remanding of the petitioners to judicial custody by a Magistrate not competent to try the case without formal submission of challan within the statutory period of 15 days has made their detention as illegal.

4. Learned counsel for the State has opposed the bail. According to him, the petitioners have abused their official position and mis appropriated the public money.

5. The total misappropriated amount is Rs. 4,532 only. The petitioners have been sent to judicial lock‑up. No recovery is to be made from them. Finding of the Departmental Inquiry Committee is in their favour. No permission was obtained from the concerned authorities for the registration of the case against the petitioners or for their arrest. Two of the petitioners are public servants and there is no apprehension of their abscondence.

6. In these circumstances, I admit the petitioners to bail in the sum of Rs.10,000 each with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of A. C., Muzaffargarh.

M. A. K. Bail allowed.

Find a Lawyer Near You

Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.