Rana ABDUL AHAD vs THE STATE
This matter concerns a petition for post-arrest bail filed by an accused charged with offences under the Customs Act, 1969, arising from allegations of revenue loss due to tampering with customs records. The prosecution alleged that the petitioner, an employee of a customs clearing agent, colluded with others to deprive the government of revenue. The core legal question was whether the petitioner was entitled to bail given the circumstances, including the partial deposit of the disputed revenue amount and the fact that co-accused had already been granted pre-arrest bail. The Court observed that a significant portion of the alleged revenue loss had already been deposited by the importer, and the petitioner had deposited 50% of the remaining disputed amount under protest, without admitting liability. Noting that co-accused had been granted bail and that the petitioner had been declared innocent in adjudication proceedings, the Court held that the case fell within the scope of further inquiry. Consequently, the Court granted post-arrest bail, establishing the principle that partial deposit of disputed amounts and parity with co-accused can render a case one of further inquiry under Section 497, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898.
- Does the deposit of a portion of the disputed revenue amount under protest render a case one of further inquiry for the purpose of bail?
- Can an accused person be granted bail if their co-accused have already been granted pre-arrest bail in the same case?
- Does the deposit of a disputed amount in a customs case constitute an admission of guilt or liability?
- Section 156(1)(9), Customs Act 1969
- Section 156(1)(14), Customs Act 1969
- Section 156(1)(14-A), Customs Act 1969
- Section 156(1)(77), Customs Act 1969
- Section 156(1)(81), Customs Act 1969
- Section 156(1)(82), Customs Act 1969
- Section 32, Customs Act 1969
- Section 32-A, Customs Act 1969
- Section 83, Customs Act 1969
- Section 178, Customs Act 1969
- Section 497(2), Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
ORDER
' M. BILAL KHAN, J.---Rana Abdul Ahad son of Rana Muhammad Khalid, the petitioner seeks post- arrest bail in case F.I.R. No.20 of 2007, dated 12-9-2007 registered with Police Station I & P 'Branch, Directorate General Intelligence and Investigation FBR, Faisalabad for offences under section 156(1)
(9)(14)(14-A)(77)(81)(82) read with sections 32, 32-A, 83.And 178 of the Customs Act, 1969.
2. Briefly stated the facts of the prosecution case are that the Director Intelligente and Investigation FBR Lahore had received information through reliable sources that some importers and clearing agents in collusion with customs staff had deprived government of its due revenue and that they had misappropriated tax amounts. On the basis of said information an investigating team had been constituted by Deputy Director Faisalabad. The said investigating team on preliminary checking , found some tampering with the record/bill of entry No.245, dated 5-6-2006 and GD No.570, dated 22-8-2006. The said team had come to the conclusion that by the aforesaid manipulation the government had been deprived of its revenue amounting to Rs.7,53,056. Hence the instant case.
3. The petitioner was arrested along with his co-accused on 12-9-2007. His co-accused namely Bashir Ahmed Zafar and Masood Afzal Khan Lodhi Principal Appraisers of Customs Department, however, managed to obtain pre-arrest bail in the case.
4. The petitioner's plea for post-arrest bail did not find favour with the learned Special Judge Customs Lahore, who turned down his bail application. Hence the instant petition.
5. I have heard Mian Abdul Ghaffar, the learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Muhammad Khalid Chaudhry, Legal Advisor to Customs Department and have peruse the record brought by Muhammad Anwar Inspector/Intelligence Officer, I & P Cell, Directorate General Intelligence and Investigation FBR, Faisalabad.
6. It has not been denied by the Customs Department that out of the total revenue loss of Rs.7,53,056 Rs.6,13,000 have been deposited by the importer. Out of the remaining amount of Rs.1,40,000 the petitioner on the last date of hearing had expressed his willingness to deposit 50% which comes to Rs.70,000 under protest in the government treasury which would be subject to final adjudication by the department. He further stated that deposit of the said amount will not be construed as an admission on his part or acknowledgement of his guilt or liability.
7. The learned counsel for the petitioner has produced pay order issued by National Bank of Pakistan Jinnah Hall Branch, Lahore in favour of Collector Customs, Faisalabad and the same has been handed over to the learned counsel for the Customs Department. It is on the record that the co-accused of the petitioner, who have- been named hereinabove have since been granted pre- arrest bail. The petitioner claims to be an employee of the Customs Clearing Agent and reportedly in the adjudication proceedings, he has been declared to be innocent, however, the department has filed a revision petition against the said adjudication.
8. Be that as it may, in view of the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case especially the deposit of 50% of remaining amount the case of the petitioner has been rendered one of further inquiry within the meanings of subsection(2) of section 497, Cr.P.C.
9. Resultantly, this petition is allowed and the petitioner is admitted to post-arrest bail subject to his furnishing bail bond in the sum of Rs.1,00,000 (one lac) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction Deputy Registrar (Judicial) of this Court.