2017 P Cr (PLP)
YASIR RASHEED — Applicant Versus The STATE — Respondent
| Citation | 2017 P Cr (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Sindh |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | YASIR RASHEED — Applicant Versus The STATE — Respondent |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2017 P Cr (PLP)?
This judgment primarily cites: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2017 P Cr (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the Sindh bench comprising: N/A.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2017 P Cr (PLP) (YASIR RASHEED — Applicant Versus The STATE — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Headnotes / Summary
S. 497
Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss. 409, 420, 467, 471 & 109
Foreigners Act (XXXI of 1946), Ss. 3(2), 13 & 14
Prevention of Corruption Act (II of 1947), S. 5(2)
Criminal breach of trust by public servant, or banker, merchant or agent, cheating and dishonestly inducing delivery of property, forgery of valuable security, will etc., using as genuine a forged document, abetment, attempts, etc., to contravene the provisions of Foreigners Act, 1946 etc., criminal misconduct
Allegations against accused were that he, with collusion of main accused had entered wrong and incorrect data in national database of a Pakistan citizen to enable foreign nationals to get Computerized National Identity Card
Forty such cards were found to have been issued to foreign nationals
Accused at the time of entry of record of such persons did not check relevant documents which indicated that he was working hand in gloves with the main accused
Accused purposely and wilfully avoided to discharge his duty according to Standard Operating Procedure with intention to issue an important nationality document to an alien
Prima facie, sufficient material was available which was sufficient to connect accused with commission of offence
Bail was refused accordingly. [Paras. 3 & 5 of the judgment]
Judgment & Decree
FAHIM AHMED SIDDIQUI, J.
Applicant is seeking his release on bail by preferring the instant bail application. The allegations against the applicant are that he with inclusion of the main accused, has entered wrong and incorrect information/data in the national database of Pakistani citizen to enable foreign nationals to get CNIC.
2. I have heard the arguments advanced and scanned the relevant record in the light of submission made before me.
3. It transpired from the record provided by the learned DAG that some complaints were received from citizen that in their family tree certain aliens have been registered. On such complaints, inquiry initiated and applicant/accused along with other culprits booked in the case after investigation. In the instant matter 40 such CNICs were found to be issued to foreign nationals. The applicant/accused at the time of entry the record of such persons did not bother to check the relevant documents, which indicates that he is working hands in gloves with the main accused.
4. Providing assistance to a foreign national in procuring a CNIC is a serious offence. The gravity of offence is enhanced in the present national security context when the entire nation is facing the evil of foreign aided terrorism. Under the standard operating procedure, an official of NADRA is bound to check and verify certain documents of a person before entering his record in national database. As soon as, the record is entered in the national database, the family tree is popped up. If the name of such person is not in the family tree, then his record should not be entered without providing some documentary proof by him that he belongs to that very family. In the instant case, the complainants have approached the authorities with complaint that the persons shown in their family tree do not belong to their family, which is adequate to establish that the record was falsely entered in the national database.
5. The applicant/accused purposely and willfully avoided to discharge his duties according to SOP with intention to issue an important nationality document to an alien. Prima facie, sufficient material is floating at the surface of the case, which is sufficient to connect him with the commission of offence, therefore the applicant/accused is not entitled for concession of bail at this stage. In this respect I would like to take reliance from the case of Wazir Gul v. The State and 2 others; 2016 PCr.LJ 951 (Peshawar).
6. Before parting with this order, it is directed that any observations recorded in this order, being purely tentative in nature, should in no way prejudice the proceedings before the learned trial court where the case be decided strictly on its own merits after recording evidence. WA/Y-1/Sindh Bail refused.