Pakistan Case Law
2017 YLRN 325

RAIS AHMED SIDDIQUI Versus State

โญ Prefer in Google
Citation2017 YLRN 325
CourtSindh High Court
Judge(s)Shahnawaz Tariq

ORDER

SHAHNAWAZ TARIQ,J:-- This common oder will dispose of Criminal Bail Application No.706 of 2016 filed by applicant Rais Ahmed Siddiqui and Criminal Bail Application No.739 of 2016 filed by applicant Intikhab Alam, whereby they have impugned order dated 18.05.2016, passed by the learned II- Special Judge Central, Karachi.

2. Necessary facts spelt out from instant bail application are that Complainant Sub-Inspector Muhammad Mansoor Mohmand, FIA AHT Circle, Karachi, received credible information and conducted raid on 13.4.2016 at the office of M/s Karachi Trade Test and Training Centre and confiscated 9 Test Reports in the names of different persons and other blank Test Reports along with other articles. Complainant also apprehended Raees Ahmed Siddiqui, Anis Ahmed Siddiqui and Intikhab Alam from said office. It is further alleged that applicants are involved in illegally facilitating the intending emigrants by issuing them fraudulent test reports. It also alleged that applicant Rais Ahmed Siddiqui had received amounts from five persons for providing them jobs in Dubai, hence intant FIR.

3. Learned counsel for applicants contended that M/s. Karachi Trade Testing and Training Centre is registered with Sindh Technical Education and Vocational Training Authority, Government of Sindh bearing Sr. No.2159, dated 19.3.2015; that said registration has expired and applicants have already approached for renewal of registration vide application dated 21.4.2016 and renovation fee Rs.2,700/- was paid through pay order dated 21.4.2016, Bank Al- Falah D.H.A. Phase-1, which is pending before competent authority. Learned counsel further emphasized that 9 certificates have been confiscated by complainant but none of them has come forward to support prosecution story; that no time for conducting raid has been mentioned in FIR and mushirnama, hence case requires further enquiry.

3. Learned Standing counsel, while controverting the above submissions, contended that applicants have been indulged in issuing trade test reports without any authority; that five aggrieved persons have deposed that they paid amounts to applicant Rais Ahmed for proving jobs in Dubai. Learned Standing Counsel relied on 2015 SCMR 173.

4. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record, which reflects that raid was conducted on 13.04.2016, but no time of said raid is mentioned in FIR and mashirnama. Allegedly 9 Test Reports were confiscated in the names of different persons for office of applicants but during investigation none of them came forward to corroborate the allegations levelled against applicants for issuance of forged certificates. Alleged offences fall within the definition of sections 18(a) and 22(b) of Emigration Ordinance, 1979, which are punishable for 14 years or fine or with both. Similarly, during investigation statements of five persons were recorded by Investigating Officer that they had paid amounts for providing Visa and jobs in Dubai but no prima facie incriminating material has been placed on record including passports or fake visa etc. which attracts section 17(2) of Emigration Ordinance, 1979, which is punishable for five years or fine or with both. Indeed, for the alleged offences alternate punishments i.e. imprisonment or fine or both have been provided in statute, which do not fall with the ambit of restraining clause of section 497(1), Cr.P.C. When two punishments are provided for the alleged offence in schedule, for the purpose of bail, lesser quantum of sentence should be taken into consideration.

5. Considering the above facts, circumstances and quantum of sentence, applicants have succeeded to make out their case for grant of bail on the ground of further inquiry. Consequently, applicants are admitted to post arrest bail on furnishing solvent surety in the sum of Rs.2,00,000/- (two lacs) each and P.R. bonds in the like amount to the satisfaction of learned trial Court.

The observations made supra are tentative in nature and learned trial Court shall decide the case strictly on merits.

WA/R-29/Sindh Bail granted.

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