Bachu Mal (Petitioner) VS Fed: of Pakistan & others (Respondent)

ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH,

CIRCUIT COURT, HYDERABAD.

C.P. No.D-1309 of 2018.

DATE ORDER WITH SIGNATURE OF JUDGE

For orders on office objection.

For Katcha peshi.

Present:

Mr. Justice Muhammad Junaid Ghaffar.

Mr. Justice Amjad Ali Sahito.

Date of hearing: 13.6. 2018.

Date of order: 13.6. 2018.

Mr. Jawaid Mir Shaikh, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Jangu Khan, Special Prosecutor NAB.

AMJAD ALI SAHITO, J- Through instant petition, the petitioner namely Bachu Mal s/o Chatru Mal seeks post arrest bail in Reference No.01 of 2018 re: State v. Bachu Mal filed by the NAB authorities before the Accountability Court No.VI, Hyderabad.

2.Precisely the allegation against the petitioner Bachu Mal is that he was appointed in the year 1981 as Junior Clerk in the District Education Office Mirpurkhas. Over the period of time, he was promoted to Senior Clerk and then Office Superintendent (BPS-16). Prior to this the petitioner was tried for offence of corruption and corrupt practice by way of illegal/bogus appointment in the Education Department Mirpurkhas vide Reference No.21 of 2016 Re:State Vs. Munatazir Mehendi & others pending before the trial court. As per record the petitioner had received Rs.6,961,828/- in terms of his salary and other benefits from the year 1981 to-date, whereas his wife had earned Rs.10,833,379/-. Further, as per the enquiry the details of amount deposited in the bank accounts of the

accused/petitioner and his family members from 1999 to 2017 are as follows:-

Sr. Account Account No. Bank/branch year Amount No. title deposited (in Rs.)

1 Bachu Mal 0076-00531378- HBL Bank 2005- 28,113,908 s/o Chatru 01 road Branch 2017 Mal Mirpurkhas 2 Mst. Durga 0604-51-32- MCB Jail 2012- 17,263,998 Bai w/o 31001280 Road Branch 2017 Bachu Mal Hyderabad 3 Mst. Durga 0076-00531406- HBL Bank 2005- 18,788,474 Bai w/o 01 road Branch 2017 Bachu Mal Mirpurkhas 4 Bachu Mal 3051842477 NBP Main 1999- 9,215,180 and Mst. Branch 2017 Durga Bai Mirpurkhas 5 Dileep 01381500007577 Faysal Bank 2010- 8,909,562 Kumar s/o Saddar 2017 Bachu Mal Branch Hyderabad 6 Dileep 01022164996 Soneri Bank 2005- 6,832,286 Kumar s/o Main Branch 2017 Bachu Mal Hyderabad 7 Hitesh 01381500007576 Faysal Bank, 2010- 6,191,264 Kumar s/o Sadddar 2017 Machu Mal Branch Hyderabad 8 Reeta Bai 1043-79004803- HBL Jail 2013- 5,604,792 w/o Dileep 01 Road Branch 2017 Kumar Hyderabad 9 Darshna 1043-79007802- HBL Jail 2013- 7,049,050 Devi w/o 01 Road Branch 2017 Hitesh Hyderabad Kumar Total amount 107,968,514 deposited Less intra 10,146,672 account transactions & salaries Less 29,080,000 payments made for purchase of property Unjustified 68,741,842 bank transactions

The investigation further reveals that the petitioner/accused has purchased following immovable properties in Hyderabad and Mirpurkhas during the period of his service, details of which given below:

Sr. Property details Name of Year of Purchase Rental No. owner/ Purchase Price (in income (in seller Rs.) as per Rs.) as per sale Rent agreement agreement nd 1 Flat No.D-5 2 Waseem 2011 2,200,000/- -- floor Unique Ahmed s/o Centre Hirabad Allah Hyderabad Bachayo st 2 Flat No.8 1 --- 2012 2,100,000/- -- floor Hirabad Centre Hyderabad 3 Flat No.2 1st Waseem 2012 2,000,00/- -- floor Amir Ahmed s/o Palace, Hirabad Allah Hyderabad Bachayo 4 Flat No.5 & 6 Mrs. 2012 1,650,000/- 12000/- per nd 2 floor Nasreenw/ month (one Shaheed o flat) Atiqullah Attaullah Heights Hyderabad 5 Flat No.12 3rd Zubari 2013 2,800,000/- -- floor Memon Ahmed s/o Heights Ghulam Luxury Nabi Apartment Plot No.A-6 Qasimabad Hyderabad 6 Flat No.33-115 Mohan 2014 1,275,000/- 6000/- per Roshan Lal month Shopping Garden Mirpurkhas 7 House No.123 Niaz 2014 2,350,000/- -- Meer Farm Muhamma colony d s/o Mirsi Mirpurkhas Kerio 8 Plot No.P-186 Mst. 2015 3,500,000/- --- Rahim Nagar Saeeda Mirpurkhas w/o Muhamma d Ibal Memon 9 Flat No.17, 18, Mrs. 2015 7,200,000/- -- th 19 and 20 5 Nasreen floor Shaheed w/o Atiqullah Attaullah

Heights Hyderabad 10 Flat No.3 1st Dhanraj 2016 3,750,000/- 13000/- per floor Sadaf Mal s/o month Centre Tando Leeela Wali Ram Muhammad Hyderabad 11 Flat No.15, 3rd Haji 2016 3,450,000 12000/- per floor Sadaf Ghulam month Centre Sarwar s/o Hyderabad Haji Jan Muhamma d 12 Plot No.27 Farhanulla 2016 8,000,000/- 36000/- per Rev.Survey h s/o month No.627 Mehran Hidayatull Homes ah Kerio Qasimabad Hyderabad 13 Flat in Ashfaq Aftab 2016 2,00,000/- 11500/- per Corner Tando month Wali Muhammad Hyderabad 14 Flat No.13 3rd Fayaz Ali 2017 3,850,000/- -- floor Sanam Shah Centre Tando Wali Muhammad Total 46,125,000 90,500/- amount per month

During the course of inquiry/investigation on source of information search was carried out at the residence of the petitioner, after obtaining search warrant U/s 96 Cr.P.C from the concerned Magistrate the following movable and immovable properties were recovered/seized.

a. Movable assets:

i. Prized Bonds (different denominations) worth Rs.25,3225 Million ii. Saving certificates worth Rs.5 Million iii.Postal Life Insurance worth Rs.2 Million b. Immovable assets:

i. Sale agreements/deeds of various flats across Hyderabad, Mirpurkhas and Karachi worth more than Rs.30. Million including the following.

a) Flat No.33-115 Roshan Shopping Garden Mirpukhas

b) Plot No.P-186 Rahim Nabar Mirpukhas

c) Plot No.27 R.S.No.627 Mehran Homes Qasimabad Hyderabad.

d) Flat No.15, 3rd floor Sadaf Centre Tando Wali Muhammad Hyderabad e) Flat No.3 1st floor Sadaf Centre Tando Wali Muhammad Hyderabad f) Flat No.13 3rd floor Sanam Centre Tando Wali Muhammad g) Flat No.8 1st floor Hirabad Centre Hyderabad h) Flat No.134 and floor City Survey No.162/2 Nisar Building Jail Road Hyderabad.

i)Flat No.2 1st floor Mehran Apartment Hirabad Hyderabad j) Flat No.5 & 6, 2nd floor Shaheed Atiqullah Heights Hyderabad k) Flat No.17, 18, 19 and 20 5th floor Shaheed Atiqullah Heights Hyderabad ii. purchase receipts of Motor vehicles worth more than Rs.1.5 Mill.

The finally total liability of the petitioner/accused is determined on the basis of cash flow chart given below:-

Sr.No. Description(a) Amount Salary (c) Net Liability Credited (b) (b-c) 1 Unjustified 78,999,514/- 10,146,672/- 68,741,42/- Bank Transactions 2 Cash Flow -- -- 16,906,788 chart 3 Recovery -- -- 30,322,500 during house search Net liability 115,971,130/-

3.In view of above it has been established that the petitioner/accused has been accumulated assets of Rs.11,59,71,130/- which were found beyond known source of income for which petitioner/accused could not justify the legal sources. Thus reference was filed against the petitioner.

4.Prior to this the petitioner filed a constitutional petition No.D- 3655/2016 for grant of pre-arrest bail which was dismissed by this court vide order dated 27.09.2017 and on same date he was arrested.

5.Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case; that petitioner has earned the entire property as well as bank balance from his business of sale and purchase of the property; that prosecution has examined 10-witnesses and they have not implicated the petitioner in any manner in this reference;

that there are general and vague allegations against the petitioner without assigning any specific role against him in the reference. He, therefore, prayed for grant of bail. He relied upon the case of Muhammad Nadeem Anwar & another Vs. National Accountability Bureau & others reported in PLD 2008 SC-645 and unreported cases of Ghulam Qadir Rajper Vs.

Federation of Pakistan C.P.No.D-2736 of 2016, Muhammad Iqbal Vs.

Federation of Pakistan C.P.No.D-28 of 2017, Anwar Ali Thebo Vs. National Accountability Bureau (NAB) & others C.P.No.D-3033 of 2016 and Lachman Das & another Vs. Federation of Pakistan C.P.No.D-1660 of 2016

6.Learned Special Prosecutor NAB opposed the grant of bail on the ground that on the pointation of the petitioner a huge cash, prize bonds, saving certificates and postal life insurance as well as documents of immovable assets were recovered for which he could not offer any plausible explanation; that there is sufficient material against the petitioner in the shape of documentary evidence and he is not entitled for grant of bail.

7.We have considered the submissions of the parties and have perused the material available on record including the case law cited at bar. The petitioner was working as Office Superintendent in BPS-16 in Education Department and he was arrested on 27.09.2017. The raid was conducted at his residence situated at Hyderabad after obtaining search warrant from concerned Magistrate, the Investigating Officer recovered Prize bonds (different denomination) worth of Rs.25.3225 Million, saving certificates worth of Rs.5.Million and Postal life insurance worth of Rs.2 Million, the

documents of multiple movable and immovable property worth of Rs.30- Millions including 9-flats situated in different cities viz. Mirpurkhas, Qasimabad Tando Wali Muhammad Hyderabad, motor vehicle worth of Rs.1.5 million. The total liability of the petitioner determined by the Investigating Officer is Rs.11,59,71,130/-. The documentary and other evidence available on record does not telly with the known sources of income of the petitioner and it rather seems to connect the petitioner with the alleged offence. In this reference 10-witnesses have been examined by the trial court and near future the trial will be completed, in these circumstances any observation regarding merit or otherwise at this stage would prejudice the case of either parties. In this context the reliance is placed upon the case of Muhammad Nawaz Vs. The State which is reported in 2002 SMCR-1381 wherein Honourable Supreme Court has held that:

“since, the trial is liable to be concluded in the near future as such, we are deliberately not attending to the merit of the case least it may prejudice the case of either party. In this view of the matter, we are not inclined to grant concession of post arrest bail to the petitioner at this stage”.

Therefore, we are of the view that prima facie sufficient material is available on record to connect the present petitioner with the commission of alleged offence hence the petitioner Bachu Mal has not been able to make out the case for grant of bail. Accordingly the petition was dismissed by us vide shot order dated 13.6.2018.

JUDGE.

JUDGE.