FARAZ ANWAR vs The STATE
This matter concerns a petition for post-arrest bail filed by several officials of the NADRA office in Hangu, who were accused of facilitating the issuance of Computerized National Identity Cards (CNICs) to non-nationals and suspects by using fake attestations and inserting their names into local family trees. The core legal question was whether the petitioners were entitled to bail given the allegations of forgery and corruption, despite the lack of direct evidence linking them to the receipt of illegal gratification. The Court held that the case against the petitioners fell into the category of 'further enquiry' because there was no material evidence on record to prove they received illegal gratification or that the forged documents were in their handwriting. Consequently, the Court allowed the bail petitions, directing the release of the petitioners upon furnishing bail bonds. The key principle laid down is that where a criminal case is based on mere inferences or presumptions rather than concrete evidence connecting the accused to the crime, the accused cannot be detained in prison, as such circumstances constitute a borderline case warranting further enquiry.
- Can an accused be denied bail when the prosecution case relies solely on inferences and presumptions rather than direct evidence?
- Does the absence of evidence linking an accused to the receipt of illegal gratification entitle them to bail in a corruption case?
- Is a case considered one of 'further enquiry' when the alleged forged documents are not in the handwriting of the accused?
- Section 468, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 471, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 109, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 5(2), Prevention of Corruption Act 1947
' DOST MUHAMMAD KHAN, C.J.---This single order shall also decide connected Criminal Miscellaneous (BAs) Nos. 302-P, 303-P, 304-P, 305-P, 306-P 269-P of 2013 because the petitioners of all these petitions namely, (1) Faraz Anwar, (2) Yasir Shafiq, (3) Iftikhar Ali, (4) Malik Muhammad Fayaz, (5) Muhammad Zubair, (6) Zahir, (7) Arshad Ali, (8) Muhammad Imtiaz and (9) Sajid-ur- Rehman, are seeking bail in one and the same F.I.R. No.3/2013 dated 21-1-2013 registered for crimes under sections 468/471/109, P.P.C. Read with section 5(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947 by Police Station FIA, ACC Circle.. Arguments heard and record perused.
2. It was established by the FIA Circle Peshawar during Enquiry No. 51 of 2010 that the petitioners, who are the officials of NADRA office Hangu, were found involved in issuing Computerized National Identity Cards (CNICs) to nonnations/suspects on the basis of fake attestation and then inserted their names in the family trees of local residents/Pakistani citizens for ulterior motives and considerations.
3. It is alleged that these CNICs were issued to the persons, who were no-motions/suspects. It is also alleged that the attesting elders have disowned the attestation of the forms / applications submitted for issuance of CNICs.
4. Leaving aside the legal aspects and factual merits of the case, suffice it to say that there is no materials on record or any evidence to show that the petitioners were paid illegal gratification, showing illegal favour to those suspects, to whom the CNICs were issued. Of course, only an inference can be drawn from the combined study of facts and circumstances of the case, however, whenever a criminal case is based on presumption then, it becomes a borderline case. It is settled principle of law and justice that whenever such a situation arises then, accused person cannot be kept in prison on the basis of inferences, to be drawn or presumptions, unless there is evidence connecting their necks with the commission of the crime, which is not the case in hand thus, the case of the petitioners is one of further enquiry because-the forged documents/application forms and attestations thereon were not of handwriting of the petitioners, therefore, offences under sections 468, 471 and 109, P.P.C. Are not attracted.
' Accordingly, this and the connected petitions all are allowed and the petitioners of each case are directed to be released on bail provided each of them furnishes bail bond in the sum of rupees four lac (Rs.4,00,000) with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of Illaqa/Judicial Magistrate, who shall ensure that the sureties are local, reliable and men of means, however, this order for grant of bail shall be subject to the condition that in case the petitioners repeat similar offence in future then, the present case shall be considered as a disentitling factor in the way of grant of bail to them in the future case.