2020 PLP 1160 (SCMR)
SAIMA ASHIQ JAVED — Petitioner Versus STATE through Attorney General of Pakistan, Lahore and another — Respondents
| Citation | 2020 PLP 1160 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | Supreme Court of Pakistan |
| Bench Members | Umar Ata Bandial, Faisal Arab and Qazi Muhammad Amin Ahmed, JJ |
| Parties | SAIMA ASHIQ JAVED — Petitioner Versus STATE through Attorney General of Pakistan, Lahore and another — Respondents |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2020 PLP 1160 (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2020 PLP 1160 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Supreme Court of Pakistan bench comprising: Umar Ata Bandial, Faisal Arab and Qazi Muhammad Amin Ahmed, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2020 PLP 1160 (SCMR) (SAIMA ASHIQ JAVED — Petitioner Versus STATE through Attorney General of Pakistan, Lahore and another — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Zafar Mehmood Chaudhry, Advocate Supreme Court for Petitioner along with Saima Ashiq Javed (Petitioner).
- Nemo for Respondent No. 2.
Headnotes / Summary
(Against the order dated 11.9.2019 passed by the Lahore High Court Lahore in Criminal Misc. No. 49695 of 2019)
S. 498
Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss. 409, 420, 468 & 471
Prevention of Corruption Act (II of 1947), S. 5(2)
Financial scam
Female employee of Provincial Accountant General Office using her bank account to facilitate co-accused persons in misappropriating public money
Evidence against the female-accused comprised of documented transactions involving Bank accounts including one operated by her
Contentions and denials raised by the accused could best be attended by the Trial Court
Counsel for accused was unable to point out any mala fide lurking behind her intended arrest
Law did not confer immunity on the accused on account of her gender and as such she was required to make out a case for judicial protection
Petition for leave to appeal was dismissed, and anticipatory bail was refused. Khurram Saeed, Additional Attorney General for Pakistan for the State.
Judgment & Decree
QAZI MUHAMMAD AMIN AHMED, J.
Muhammad Awais Rashid and Muhammad Adeel, Junior Auditors in the Accountant General Office Punjab, were the principal architects behind a financial scam that cost public exchequer Rs.57.6 million, misappropriated through bogus pensionary payments to the fake claimants; as the Federal Investigation Agency probed the heist, the petitioner was found to have provided space to the embezzled amounts in her bank account that reflected various transactions comprising deposit by one of the accused as well as withdrawals thereof; attempt to secure bail in anticipation to her arrest failed before the trial Judge on 17.4.2018 whereafter she applied for judicial protection in the High Court in the year 2019, on issuance of proclamation of absconsion; failure brings her to this Court. Mr. Zafar Mahmood Chaudhry, learned ASC, while disputing the accusation, craftily pressed into service petitioner's gender to argue that her remission into custody would perennially embarrass not only the petitioner but the family as well, an avoidable option inasmuch as no investigative benefit would accrue to the prosecution at the given stage of the case. Learned Additional Attorney General for Pakistan has contested the plea; according to him, the prosecution still expects disclosures from the petitioner, likely to be helpful to drive home the charge.
2. Heard. Record perused.
3. It would be less than expedient to comment upon the arguments assailing evidence, comprising documented transactions involving bank accounts including one operated by the petitioner; her denials/ explanations is a business to be best attended by the trial Court. Despite a generous opportunity, learned counsel has not been able to point out any mala fide lurking behind the intended arrest. Law does not confer immunity on the petitioner on account of her gender and as such she is required to make out a case for judicial protection; a prima facie nexus compounded by a conduct far from being enviable. Petition fails. Leave declined. MWA/S-24/SC Petition dismissed.