ORDER SHEET
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, KARACHI
Criminal Bail Application No. 1746 of 2016
Applicant: Abdul Qadeer s/o. Noor Ahmed,
through M/s. Mallag Abbas Dashti and
Chaurdhry Waseem Akhtar, Advocates.
Respondent: The State, through Mr. Muhammad Javed, K.K.
Standing Counsel a/w Inspectors Minhaj-
ul-Haq, I.O.
Date of hearing: 30.01.2017
Date of order: 30.01.2017
-----------------
O R D E R.
Zafar Ahmed Rajput, J:- Having rejected his first bail before arrest application and second after arrest bail application in Case No. 23 of 2016 by the learned Special Court (Central), Karachi, vide orders dated 08.11.2016 and 19.11.2016, respectively, the applicant/accused Abdul Qadeer s/o. Noor Ahmed, through instant Criminal Bail Application seeks post arrest bail in Crime No. 319 of 2016 registered at PS FIA AHTC, Karachi South, under Section 5(2) PCA-II, 1947 read with Section 3(2), 13/14 Foreigners Act, 1946 and Sections 409/419/420/468/471/109 P.P.C.
2. It is alleged that the Data Forms of aliens, for issuance of Pakistani CNIC, were illegally processed / approved on the basis of fake /forged documents by applicant/accused Abdul Qadeer, being incharge, and co-accused Muhammad Ali, Tariq Shah, Arhsad Hafeez , Maaz Sarfaraz, Ysmeen Gul, Naveed Alam, Nazia Ali, Syed Anwar and Yasmeen, being Data Entry Operators, by abusing their official position while posted at NADRA NRC Lyari and Keamari during the period October 2011 to June 2015. The present applicant was arrested on 19.11.2016, after rejection of his pre-arrest bail.
3. The learned counsel for the applicant/accused has mainly contended that the applicant is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case; that the alleged incident has taken place during the period from October 2011 to June, 2015 but the FIR has been lodged on 30.09.2016 and for such inordinate delay no plausible explanation has been furnished by the prosecution; that the persons who had attested the documents of the alleged aliens have not been made either accused or witnesses in the case; that about four months have passed after lodging of instant F.I.R., but the final challan has not yet been submitted; that the co-accused, namely, Naveed Alam Memon & Arshad Hafeez and Muhammad Naeem have already been granted bail by the learned trial Court vide order dated 08.11.2016 and 06.01.207, respectively; that the alleged offence is punishable for seven years imprisonment, as such, does not fall within the prohibitory clause of section 497 Cr.P.C. therefore, the applicant is liable to be released on bail coupled with the fact that he is behind the bars since 19.11.2016. In support of his contentions, learned counsel for the applicant has placed his reliance upon the un-reported orders passed by this Court in Criminal Bail Application Nos. 707 of 2015 and 585, 586, 614, 615, 1568, 1570, 1686, 1736 of 2016.
4. On the other hand, learned standing counsel has vehemently opposed this application on the ground that the applicant is nominated in the F.I.R. who, being incharge has illegally processed / approved Data forms of aliens on the basis of fake documents for issuance of Pakistani CNIC. He has contended that the co-accused who have been admitted to bail by the trial Court were the Data Entry Operators while the applicant/accused being incharge of the Centre was responsible for verification of all documents but he has processed / approved such data forms, as such, he is not entitled for the concession of bail.
5. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record.
6. It is an admitted position that the persons, who had attested the documents of alleged aliens for issuance of CNIC have not been nominated in the case as accused; even they have not been cited as witnesses in the interim challan, if their attestation was fake. The prosecution has submitted interim challan on 18.10.2016; however, the final challan has not yet been submitted despite lapse of more than three months and ten days. Admittedly, case of the prosecution is based entirely upon the documentary evidence and relevant record has already been procured and seized by the I.O. and the same is in the custody of prosecution; hence, there is no apprehension of tampering with prosecution evidence. The alleged offence caries maximum punishment of seven years, as such, the same does not fall within the prohibitory clause of Section 497 Cr.P.C. Co-accused Naveed Alam, Arshad Hafeez and Muhammad Naeem have already been granted bail by the trial Court; hence, on the rule of consistency the applicant/accused is also entitled for the concession of bail. Accordingly, applicant/accused is granted bail subject to his furnishing solvent surety in the sum of Rs.200,000/- (Rupees Two Hundred Thousand only) with P.R. Bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court.
7. Needless to mention here that if the applicant in any manner tries to misuse the concession of bail, it would be open for the trial Court to cancel his bail after issuing him the requisite notice.
JUDGE
Athar Zai