Mirza MUHAMMAD ZULFIQAR and others vs THE STATE and others
This matter concerns petitions for leave to appeal against the dismissal of bail applications by the Lahore High Court in a case involving allegations of embezzlement of pension funds and unauthorized payments to contractors by public officials. The petitioners, serving as Chief Officers of a Municipal Committee, faced charges under the Pakistan Penal Code and the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947. The core legal question was whether the petitioners were entitled to bail given the nature of the allegations and the procedural conduct of the investigating agency. The Supreme Court observed that the Anti-Corruption Establishment acted with undue haste by arresting the petitioners immediately upon their appearance in response to an inquiry notice, without confronting them with evidence or allowing them to address the charges. The Court held that the petitioners' defense regarding their lack of direct responsibility for account management warranted further consideration. Consequently, the Court converted the petitions into appeals, allowed them, and granted bail to the petitioners, emphasizing the procedural unfairness in the immediate arrest before the completion of the inquiry process.
- Does the arrest of an accused person immediately upon their appearance in response to an inquiry notice, without prior confrontation with evidence, constitute undue haste by the investigating agency?
- Is bail appropriate when the accused's direct involvement in the alleged financial irregularities is disputed and requires further investigation?
- Does a case falling within the prohibitory clause of Section 497, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898, automatically preclude the grant of bail in all circumstances?
- Section 420, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 468, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 471, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 409, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 218, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 5(2), Prevention of Corruption Act 1947
- Section 497(1), Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
' SH. IJAZ IISAR, J.---In these connected petitions leave is sought against the judgment of the Lahore High Court, Lahore dismissing Criminal Miscellaneous Nos.4561-B of 1999 and 4701-B of 1999, moved by Mirza Muhammad Zulfiqar and Shahbaz Ali petitioners.
2. The relevant facts are that Mirza Muhammad Zulfiqar and Shahbaz Ali petitioners, while posted as Chief Officers, Municipal Committee, Shakargarh allegedly embezzled a sum of Rs,7,12,797 from the pension fund and paid a sum of Rs,3,05,473 to the contractors without execution of work. On the said allegations a case under sections 420/468/471/409 and 218, P.P.C. Read with section 5(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947, was registered against them at Police Station Anti- Corruption Establishment, Narowal on 2-6-1999 on the report of Secretary to the Government of the Punjab, Local Government, Rural and Development Department, Lahore.
3. After their arrest, the petitioners moved bail applications in the High Court, which were dismissed on the ground that the case fell within the prohibitory clause of section 497(1), Cr.P.C. And further that being responsible officers they were required to look after all the affairs relating to the Municipality.
4. It is contended on behalf of the petitioners that they were not concerned with the handling of accounts which was the primary responsibility of the Chairman and the Accounts Officer. No material is available with the Investigating Agency to show that they had recommended or authorised the payments to the contractors, and further that there is no material showing any embezzlement or misappropriation of any amount from the pension fund. No inquiry was held before taking action against the petitioners, and they were arrested as soon as they appeared before the Assistant Director Anti-Corruption, in pursuance of notice to join the inquiry.
5. After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned counsel representing the State, we are of the view that the Anti-Corruption Establishment had shown haste in arresting the petitioners. They were trapped when they appeared in response to a notice to join the inquiry. They were yet to be confronted, with the material collected by the Anti-Corruption Establishment against them, but without providing a reasonable opportunity to them of meeting the charge they were arrested. The assertion made on their behalf that they were not directly concerned with the account matters needs consideration.
' Accordingly, we convert the petitions into appeals, allow the same, and admit both the petitioners to bail in the sum of Rs,1,00,000, each, with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Assistant Commissioner, Saddar, Lahore.
Cited by 4 cases
- Syed ZULQARNAIN SHAH Versus State 2022 PCrLJN 112
- RAZA MUHAMMAD Versus State 2017 PCrLJN 47
- MUHAMMAD IQBAL Versus THE STATE 2003 YLR 2395
- MUHAMMAD IQBAL Versus THE STATE 2003 YLR 2346