HIGH COURT OF SINDH AT KARACHI
Criminal Appeal No.598 of 2022
Present:
Naimatullah
Phulpoto, J.
Amjad
Ali Sahito, J
Appellant: Raza
Hussain through Mr. Rizwan
Ali Dodani, Advocate
Respondent: The State through Mr.
Peer Riaz Muhammad Shah, D.A.G.
Complainant: through Mr. Kashif Hanif, advocate
Date of hearing: 02/11/2023
Date
of announcement: 02/11/2023
J U
D G M E N T
NAIMATULLAH PHULPOTO, J:- Appellant
Raza Hussain son of Zawar Hussain was tried by learned
Judge, Special Court (Offences in Banks) Sindh at Karachi in Case No.27 of
2014, arising out of FIR No.20/2014 for offences under sections 409, 420, 468,
471, 477-A, 109, 34, PPC of P.S. FIA (CBC), Karachi. After regular trial, vide judgment
dated 16.09.2022, appellant Raza Hussain
was convicted under section 245(2), Cr.PC and
sentenced as under:
a)
Accused is convicted under Section 409 PPC and sentenced to suffer R.I for Ten
(10) Years and is also fined to Rs.25,000,000/-
(Rupees Twenty Five Million only). In case of default of payment of fine, he
shall suffer R.I. for Three (3) Years more. The imposition of fine on accused Raza Hussain is in the light of
Sub Section (3) of Section 6 of the Offences in Respect of Banks (Special
Courts) Ordinance, 1984.
b)
Accused Raza Hussain is
also convicted under Section 420 PPC and sentenced to suffer R.I for Five (5)
Years and is fined to Rs.500,000/ (Rupees Five Lacs only). In case of non-payment of fine, he will suffer
further R.I for further Two (2) Years.
c)
Accused named above is convicted under Section 468 PPC and sentenced to suffer
R.1 for Five (5) Years and is fined to Rs.500,000/-
(Rupees Five Lacs only). In case of non-payment of
fine, he will suffer further R.I for further Two (2) Years.
d)
Accused Raza Hussain is
convicted under Section 471 PPC and sentenced to suffer R.I for Two (2) Years
and is fined to Rs.200,000/- (Rupees Two Lacs only).
In case of non-payment of fine, he will suffer further R.I for One (1) Year
more.
e)
Accused is convicted under Section 477-A PPC and sentenced to suffer R.I for
Three (3) Years and is fined to Rs.300,000/- (Rupees
Three Lacs only). In case of non-payment of fine, he
will suffer further R.I for further Two (2) Years.
f)
Accused Raza Hussain shall
be entitled for the benefit of Section 382(b) Cr.P.C.
g)
All the sentences shall run concurrently.
2. Brief facts of the prosecution case as per FIR dated
19.03.2014 registered on the basis of a complaint dated 19.03.2014 moved by the
complainant Mst.
Moni Faheem, Area Manager, Habib Bank Limited, are that an incident of
misappropriation of cash through vouchers/cheques
kept as a part of cash to the tune of Rs.24,595,910/-
(so far detected) took place pertaining to HBL internal accounts as well as
from customers’ accounts as per detail mentioned below:-
S. No. |
Customer Name |
Account No. |
1. |
Ali Mumtaz |
08047900241003 |
2. |
A. Majeed |
08040026543803 |
3. |
Sajjad Ahmed |
08047900203703 |
4. |
Faheemuddin |
08047900217203 |
It is further mentioned that during inquiry of the Bank,
it came on record that appellant Raza Hussain (Operation Manager) HBL, Mansfield Branch, Karachi
in connivance with aforementioned accountholders siphoned off bank’s cash
through clearing cheques, which caused huge financial
loss to the bank and corresponding gain to himself and
his accomplice accountholders. It is also alleged in the FIR that above named
Operation Manager had also admitted his guilt. Hence, this FIR was registered
against nominated bank officials and the accountholders. After usual
investigation, challan was submitted against accused
persons.
3. Trial Court framed charge against accused on 18.04.2016, to
which they pleaded not guilty and claimed trial
.
4. Prosecution examined 9 PWs. Thereafter, prosecution side was
closed at Ex-19.
5. Statement of appellant and co-accused was recorded under
section 342, Cr.PC at Exh-20 to 25, respectively
wherein they denied the commission of offence and claimed their innocence.
6. Learned trial Court after hearing the learned counsel for
the parties and assessment of evidence convicted and sentenced the appellant as
stated above whereas co-accused Allahuddin, Ali Mumtaz, Sajjad Ahmed, Zohaib and Faheemuddin were
acquitted for want of evidence.
7. Appellant being aggrieved and dis-satisfied by the judgment
of conviction against him, filed this appeal, it was
admitted to regular hearing, notices were issued to the D.A.G. as well as
complainant.
8. At the very outset, learned advocate for the appellant
argued that learned Judge, Special Court (Offences in Banks) Sindh at Karachi
conducted the trial in a hasty manner; recorded evidence of PWs 1 to 5 in
absence of the defence counsel and a fair opportunity
was not provided to the appellant for cross-examination of the prosecution
witnesses. It is further argued that cross-examination is a valuable right of
the appellant/accused and the appellant was deprived of such right and it is
prayed that case may be remanded to the trial Court for providing a fair
opportunity to the appellant to cross-examine the witnesses. Learned D.A.G.
concedes to the contentions raised by the counsel for the appellant and submits
that it is a fit case to remand the same to the trial Court for providing a fair
opportunity to the appellant to cross-examine PWs 1 to 5.
9. Mr. Kashif Hani, learned advocate
for the complainant submits that opportunity was provided to appellant but he
did not avail it and the delay would be caused in case the case is remanded
back to the trial Court. He has opposed the prayer made by the advocate for the
appellant for remand of the case to the trial Court.
10. We have heard the learned counsel for the
parties and re-examined the entire prosecution evidence. It appears that
evidence of PWs 1 to 5 is very much essential for just decision of the case
without cross-examination of PWs 1 to 5, this Court
will not be able to reach at just conclusion. Even otherwise, in terms of
Article 10-A of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973, a fair
trial and due process is the right of appellant/accused. It appears that
several documents have been produced by the prosecution witnesses, particularly
by PW-1 but he was not cross-examined by accused. We have also observed that on
the relevant dates, advocate for accused Raza Hussain was also not present in the Court. The trial Court
should have adjourned the case for providing another opportunity to accused Raza Hussain, to produce his
advocate before the trial Court and cross-examine the prosecution witnesses but
it was not done. The manner in which the trial was conducted by the trial Court
it appears that illegality has been committed and it is not curable under the
law. Law also favours the adjudication of the cases
on merits. Therefore, the judgment dated 16.09.2022 to the extent of appellant Raza Hussain is not sustainable
under the law, the same is set aside and the case is remanded to the trial
Court to the extent of appellant/accused Raza Hussain for cross-examination of PWs 1 to 5. After
cross-examination, statement of accused shall be recorded afresh. The case is
old one of 2014, trial Court is directed to conclude the trial preferably within
two months, strictly in accordance with law.
The instant appeal is disposed of in the above terms.
J U D G E
J
U D G E
Gulsher/PS