Pakistan Case Law
2023 SHC 1092

Barkat Ali Mahesar vs The State

⭐ Prefer in Google
Citation2023 SHC 1092
CourtSindh High Court
Case No.Crl. Bail Application No.S-278 of 2023
Date2023-11-29
Judge(s)Irshad Ali Shah
ResultApplication Dismissed
AI Summary — generated from this judgment; read the full text below and verify before relying on it.

The applicant, an Incharge at a Wheat Procurement Center, sought post-arrest bail regarding allegations of misappropriating 4,860 metric tons of wheat valued at Rs. 243 million during the 2020/2021 stock season. The applicant argued innocence, citing delayed FIR lodgment and the existence of a separate NAB reference, contending the offence did not fall within the prohibitory clause. The State opposed bail, emphasizing the magnitude of public money misappropriated and distinguishing the current case from the separate NAB reference involving a different stock season. The Court held that the misappropriation of public funds on such a large scale affects society at large, placing the offence within the exceptional clause of bail considerations. It further noted that the delay in FIR lodgment was natural given the nature of the investigation required. Finding reasonable grounds to believe the applicant was guilty, the Court dismissed the bail application, ruling that it would be premature to accept the plea of false implication at this stage.

Questions settled in this judgment
  • Does the misappropriation of public funds on a large scale bring an offence within the exceptional clause for bail?
  • Is a delay in the lodgment of an FIR regarding the misappropriation of public funds sufficient grounds for the grant of bail?
  • Can a separate NAB reference regarding a different time period be used to claim false implication in a current criminal case?
Laws & provisions referred
  • Section 497, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
post-arrest bailmisappropriation of public fundsprohibitory clausefurther inquirywheat procurementanti-corruption

Irshad Ali Shah, J. It is alleged that the applicant while posted Incharge at Wheat Procurement Center Darbelo misappropriated 48600 bags of wheat (4860 Matric Tons) worth Rs.24,3000000/-, for the stock season 2020/2021, for that he was booked and reported upon by Anti-Corruption Police.

2. The applicant, on having been refused post arrest bail by learned Special Judge, Anti-Corruption (Provincial) Sukkur, Division Camp @ Naushahro Feroze; has sought for the same from this Court by way of instant Crl. Bail Application under section 497 Cr.P.C.

3. It is contended by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant being innocent has been involved in this case falsely by the police; the FIR of the incident has been lodged with considerable delay; on same cause a reference has also been filed against the applicant before the NAB Court and the offence alleged against him is not falling within prohibitory clause; therefore, he is entitled to be released on bail on point of further inquiry.

4. Learned APG for the State has opposed to release of the applicant on bail by contending that huge public money has been misappropriated by the applicant and instant case has nothing to do with the reference against the applicant, which is pending before the NAB Court.

5. Heard arguments and perused the record.

6. The applicant is named in the FIR with specific allegation that he being incharge at Wheat Procurement Center Darbelo misappropriated the wheat worth Rs.24,30,00000/- for stock season 2020/2021. The NAB reference filed against him is with regard to the misappropriation committed during wheat stock season for 2019/2020. In that situation the contention of learned APG for the State that the instant case has nothing to do with the NAB reference against the applicant could not be lost sight of. The delay in lodgment of the FIR, if any, is natural in case like the present one, which requires inquiry and investigation prior to its lodgment; such delay even otherwise could not be resolved by this Court at this stage. The offence relating to misappropriation of the public money to such a large scale is affecting the society at large, which obviously has put the same within ambit of exceptional clause. It would be premature to say that the applicant being innocent has been involved in this case falsely by the Anti-Corruption Police. There appear reasonable grounds to believe that the applicant is guilty of the offence with which he is charged and no case for his release on bail is made-out.

7. In view of above, the instant Crl. Bail Application is dismissed.

For educational and research use only — not legal advice. Verify against the official report before relying on it. See our Disclaimer.