ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, CIRCUIT COURT, LARKANA

Crl. Bail Appln. No.S-145 of 2012

DATE OF HEARING

ORDER WITH SIGNATURE OF HON’BLE JUDGE

18.1.2013.

For Hearing.

Mr. Sarfraz Khan Jatoi, advocate for applicant, alongwith applicant.

Mr. Imtiaz Ahmed Shahani, State Counsel.

---------------------------

This is a bail application under Section 498, Cr.P.C, whereby applicant Muhammad Usman seeks pre-arrest bail in crime No.11/2011, registered at Police Station ACE, Jacobabad, for offence under Sections 409, 471, 120-B, PPC read with Section 5(2) Act-II, 1947.

2/- Brief facts of the prosecution case are that 20.7.2011 Safdar Ali Junejo, Circle Officer, ACE, Jacobabad lodged F.I.R at P.S ACE, Jacobabad, stating therein that accused Anees-ur-Rahman Mahar, the then DFC, Jacobabad in collusion with Tariq Abro, Clerk, DFC Office, Jacobabad, Shahal Khan Arbani, the then Head Clerk, DFC, Jacobabad, Qaisar Ali Hashmi, the then District Accounts Officer, Jacobabad, Ghulam SArwar Pathan, the then District Accounts Officer, Jacobabad, Hidayat Bux alias Babar Pathan, Superintendent, DFC Office, Jacobabad and Muhammad Usman, Auditor, District Accounts Office, Jacobabad, misappropriated government amount of Rs.4410500/- in various Heads i.e., difference amount of pay bills of Chowkidars of Food Department, Jacobabad and other amount by way of fraud and forgery by managing false record and withdrawals against the funds during period from July 2005 to November 2006.

3/- It is contended by the learned Counsel that other co-accused, namely, Anees-ur-Rahman, Qaisar Ali, Hidayat Bux alias Babar and Shahal Khan were let-off during the investigation and they withdrew their bail applications, which orders are placed on record. It is contended by the learned Counsel for the applicant that the role of the applicant as an Auditor has been limited to the extent whereby he only had to see the genuineness of the bills and as far as preparation of the bills is concerned, that role has not been assigned to the applicant. It is further contended that the bills and other documents presented as claim for money are received and examined by the Accountant and it is to be laid before the T.O., who if thinks that the claim is admissible, the authority good, the signature are genuine and in order and the receipt on legal employee's role. Such signatures of the applicant do not contribute towards the misappropriation. It is pointed out that the bills were correctly passed by the T.O. and also correctly initiated by the applicant/accused and the amount of bills was passed with the condition of "Payees Account Only" and as such since the cross cheques were issued to the Payees Account, it does not constitute or amount to any misappropriation.

4/- Learned State Counsel, on the other hand, submits that since he is an Auditor, therefore, the prime role in such misappropriation is of the applicant. He has, however, no answer as far as letting of the other accused is concerned, as it is alleged that the applicant in collusion the co-accused, who were let-off at the time of submission of challan, has misappropriated the government amount.

5/- I have heard the learned Counsel and perused the record.

6/- It appears that the applicant Muhammad Usman, who is alleged to be Auditor in the District Accounts Office, Jacobabad, in collusion with the other co-accused misappropriated the government amount, however, it has not been clarified to the satisfaction of the Court that how the co-accused were let-off. I also prima facie observe that the role of the applicant is limited to the extent to see the genuineness of bills and to see that the claim is within budget available. I am not inclined to go into the deeper appreciation of the evidence regarding the strictness of the role, as it might prejudice the case of either side. Since it involves further enquiry, therefore, the interim pre-arrest bail granted to the applicant is hereby confirmed on the same terms and conditions.

JUDGE