ALLAH WARAYO vs THE STATE
This is a post-arrest bail application filed by Allah Warayo against the State, arising from an FIR registered at Police Station Waleed, Larkana, for offences under sections 409, 406, 468, and 477 of the Pakistan Penal Code. The core legal question revolves around whether the accused is entitled to bail where the prosecution's case rests entirely on documentary evidence already in its possession and where questions of further inquiry arise regarding the manipulation of records and unexplained deposit procedures. The Sindh High Court held that a case for further inquiry was made out, noting that no recovery was effected from the applicant, the currency note numbers were not recorded, and the documentary evidence was already in the custody of the prosecution. The court laid down the principle that bail should be granted where the evidence is documentary, leaving no room for tampering, and where the State raises no objection to the same.
- Whether bail should be granted when the case of the prosecution depends entirely on documentary evidence in possession of the prosecution?
- Does the absence of currency note numbers in the recovery memo make the recovery meaningless for the purpose of bail?
- Whether a case of further inquiry is made out under section 497(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code when questions arise regarding the authenticity of station diary entries?
- Section 409, Pakistan Penal Code
- Section 406, Pakistan Penal Code
- Section 468, Pakistan Penal Code
- Section 477, Pakistan Penal Code
- Section 324, Pakistan Penal Code
- Section 302, Pakistan Penal Code
- Section 395, Pakistan Penal Code
- Section 397, Pakistan Penal Code
- Section 148, Pakistan Penal Code
- Section 149, Pakistan Penal Code
ORDER
1. ' Bail has been sought in a case registered at Police Station -Waleed, Larkana for an offence punishable under sections 409, 406, 468, and 477, P.P.C.
2. ' The case of prosecution as disclosed in the F.I.R. Is that on 6-10-1997 Ghulam Abbas Gadhi S.H.O.
3. Police Station Civil Lines, Larkana during the investigation of crime No,75 of 1997 of Police Station Civil Lines under sections 324, 302, 395, 397, 148 and 149, P.P.C. Recovered a cash of rupees five lacs in the form of currency notes and deposited the same with the WHC of Police Station Taluka, who made such entry at serial No,19 of the station diary/ Roznamcha of the Police. Station. Incidentally, on 24-10-2001 the same S.H.O. Took over the charge of Police Station, Taluka, Larkana and enquired from WHC Allah Warayo Kalhoro (the applicant) about the cash, who replied that on his transfer he had entrusted the money to A.S.1. Muhammad Ramzan Bhagat, but no such proof could be found on record. Consequently, after obtaining orders from the D.I.G. Police, Larkana the F.I.R. Mentioned above was lodged by Ghulam Abbas Gadhi and recorded by S.H.O. Imtiaz Ali Shaikh of Police Station, Waleed. The applicant was arrested on 2-11-2001 and after usual investigation, the case was challaned.
4. ' Jr. Ali Nawaz Ghanghro, learned counsel for applicant submitted that the entire case depends on a photocopy of the entry made at serial No,19 of Police Station, Taluka and it is alleged that the original has been torn off and is not available in the register. He contended that this photocopy is in usual black print but surprisingly the seal affixed thereon is in blue ink demonstrating thereby an act of manipulation at the hands of complainant Ghulam Abbas Gadhi. He further contended that no recovery has been made from applicant and even otherwise such recovery would be meaningless, as numbers of the notes are not described in the Mashirnama. He raised another point on the basis of probabilities that the complainant at the time of recovery was Incharge of Police Station, Civil Lines, which was a newly constructed building having a strong room, yet the complainant opted to bypass his own police station and deposited the currency with the WMC of Taluka Police Station. He relied on Saeed Ahmed v. State (1995 SCM R 170) and submitted that the case entirely depends upon documentary evidence, therefore, in view of law laid down by Honourable Supreme Court, the applicant is entitled to grant of bail.
5. Mr. Muhammad Ismail Bhutto, learned State counsel submitted that the material so for collected by police is such that a further enquiry is required to establish the guilt of the applicant and as such he has no ' objection to the grant of bail.
6. I have examined all these contentions and agree to most of the points raised by Mr. Ghanghro, learned counsel for applicant. Absence of numbers of currency notes and depositing the 'same with another police station bypassing his own police station where a strong room was built are the imminent factors that cannot be over looked. No recovery of whatsoever currency notes has been effected from the applicant. In the cited case the offence was under sections 4061420/468/ 471/409 and following observations were made while granting bail: "The objection of the learned counsel regarding addition of section 409, P.P.C. May carry some weight while considering the bail application. As there is no possibility of tampering with the evidence, which is entirely documentary in nature and in possession of the prosecution, in the circumstances, we convert the petition into an appeal and allow it, and grant bail to the petitioner on furnishing one surety in the sum of Rs,50,000 to the satisfaction of the Deputy Registrar, Supreme Court."
7. The above case was also relied upon by a Division Bench of this Court and in similar circumstances the bail was granted to the accused as the entire evidence was documentary and was in the possession of prosecution. In the circumstances, a case of further enquiry is made out and further the learned State counsel has also no objection to the grant of bail. The application is allowed, the applicant be released on bail subject to furnishing surety in the sum of Rupees two hundred thousand and P.R. Bond in the like amount, to the satisfaction of trial Court.