HAQ NAWAZ MALIK Versus THE STATE

ORDER

Through this application under section 497, Cr.P.C. the petitioner seeks bail after arrest in case F.I.R. No.95 of 2002 dated 18‑4‑2002 under sections 419/420/468/471/467/409, P.P.C. registered at Police Station City Sargodha on the statement of Ghulam Qadir Jaam, Manager, National Bank of Pakistan, Sargodha City.

2: Brief allegation as levelled in the F.I.R. against the petitioner is that he on 7‑2‑2002 got opened Account No.PLS‑11549‑9 in the name of Mst. Jannat Mai in the Branch of complainant by verifying the signature and I.D. Card of said Mst. Jannat Mai. It is further alleged that on 19th February, 2002 he submitted application for issuance of Cheque Book, which he received on the same day and on 24‑3‑2002 an amount of Rs.1,36,271 was received in the account of said Mst. Jannat Bibi from Benevolent Fund of Government. On 28‑3‑2002 the petitioner got drawn an amount of Rs.30,000 from said account on a cheque allegedly issued by Mst. Jannat Bibi. On 30‑3‑2002 Maqsood Ahmad, co‑accused of petitioner, Clerk of Benevolent Fund D.C.O. Office submitted a cheque of Rs.40,000 for its encashment from the account of Mst. Jannat Bibi. The complainant found suspicious circumstance and two of his subordinates told about the bad repute of Maqsood Ahmad as he used to open bank account of widows. Haq Nawaz, petitioner also came on 16‑4‑2002 for encashment of two cheques. He was interrogated by the complainant and other bank employee, who told the employees that this account was got opened by him on the asking of Maqsood Ahmad, co -accused and admitted that he produced I.D. Card and other document of Mst. Jannat Bibi and got encashed a cheque of Rs.30,000. Haq Nawaz petitioner was handed over to the police and on the application of complainant the abovesaid F.I.R. was registered.

3. The learned counsel for petitioner contends that the amount of Rs.30,000 which was got encashed by the petitioner has been deposited by his co‑accused Maqsood Ahmad on 25‑4‑2002. The learned counsel has drawn the attention of this Court to the statement of petitioner made before the Bank Staff in which he told them that the account was opened by him on the asking of Maqsood Ahmad and the amount drawn by him was handed over to him. In these circumstances according to the learned counsel the petitioner had no criminal intent and he acted in good faith on asking of main accused and in other words the petitioner had been used as tool to commit the alleged crime by Maqsood Ahmad. It is further contended that the petitioner is in jail since 18th Aprif, 2002 and is no more required for the purpose of investigation. The learned counsel further submits that section 409, P.P.C. has been deleted therefore, the case against the petitioner does not fall within prohibitory clause. The learned counsel has referred to the judgment of Honourable Supreme Court in Criminal Petition No. 143 of 2002, in which case the bail was granted to the co‑accused as the case did not fall within prohibitory clause.

4. On the other hand, the learned State Counsel has opposed the application on the ground that the petitioner is habitual in opening accounts of widows unknown to him in collusion with his co- accused Maqsood Ahmad and has introduced the widow. The learned Counsel has produced photo copies of forms of five accounts got opened by the petitioner on behalf of the widows, whose amount was got encashed subsequently. The Bank Manager/complainant has also produced certain cheques, which were submitted in the Bank for encashment by the petitioner on behalf of above said account‑holders and got encashed.

5. I have heard the learned counsel for parties and gone through the record carefully. The petitioner did not only open the account of Mst. Jannat Bibi without knowing her and also got encashed a cheque of Rs.30,000 on her behalf. This fact has been admitted by him in his statement made immediately before the Bank Staff. The Bank Manager/complainant, who is present in Court has submitted statement of accounts Nos. of Accounts opened by Mst. Jannat Bibi, Malik Haqnawaz Rhroka, Zeenat Khatoon, Mushtaq Ahmad, Naseem Akhtar and Siraj Bibi, which were got opened on the instruction of petitioner and subsequently the amounts were drawn by the petitioner on the cheques allegedly issued by said account‑holders. The Bank Manager has also submitted that the said accounts‑holders were issued registered notices, which have been received back with the report that the persons of hat identity are not living at the given addresses. In view of this it can easily be inferred that the petitioner remained habitual in opening accounts of fake persons and the evidence available on record is sufficient to believe that the petitioner is concocted with the commission of heinous offence and in collusion with his co‑accused Maqsood Ahmad got huge amount misappropriated from the Benevolent Fund meant for legal heirs of deceased Government employees. In these circumstances the petitioner is not entitled to the concession of bail. This bail application is dismissed.

6. Before parting with this order, it is further added that on a query of this Court, Shahid Nazir, Inspector, Investigating Officer of this case replied that he has deleted section 409, P.P.C. due to death of Maqsood Ahmad, co‑accused during the investigation. He has further stated that the petitioner was not involved in opening of any other account, but the Manager of Bank, present in the Court has submitted photo copies of application forms of Bank accounts which were got opened by the petitioner. In these circumstances I issue notice under section 476 read with section 195 of Criminal Procedure Code to said Inspector/S.H.O. as he made false statement in this Court to show cause why he is not convicted under section 193, P.P.C. for making false statement in this Court. He shall file his reply within four days. The office is directed to prepare separate file for the proceeding under the above article, which shall be listed on 7‑8‑2002.

N.H.Q./H‑131/L Bail refused.