1999 PLP 526 (MLD)

Muhammad Ishaque petitioner is posted as Naib Qasid in the Court of Mr. Muhammad Ikram Civil Judge 1st Class/Magistrate Section 30, Faisalabad. Shaukat Ali, Muhammad Iqbal and Muhammad Shahid accused of Crime Case No.19 of 1998 registered under sections 406 and 420 of the Pakistan Penal Code at Police Station Rail Bazar, Faisalabad made an application for bail after arrest. The said application was argued on 28-4-1998 which was also taken up on 29-4-1998 and thereafter, was accepted on 30-4-1998. It was on 2-5-1998 that Iqbal Mahmood, Ahmad posted in the aforesaid learned Court intimated the learned Presiding Officer that Muhammad Ishaque Niab Qasid (petitioner accused) had received an amount of Rs.1,000 as illegal gratification to secure the favour for the aforesaid accused persons from the Court. Muhammad Ilyas Stenographer and Abdul Rashid Stenographer posted in the Court of Mr. Sagheer Ahmad Qadri, Additional Sessions Judge, Faisalabad corroborated the aforesaid Iqbal Mahmood Ahlmad. The learned Presiding Officer gave a notice to Muhammad Ishaque Niab Qasid for 11-5-1998 who was heard when he stated that an amount of Rs.1,000 was paid by Zahid Ali, a relative of the aforesaid accused persons of aforesaid criminal case, to meet the expenses of the bread and butter of the staff of the Court. Thereafter an inquiry was held. Zahid Ali who is said to have made payment of amount of Rs.1,000 also took up the similar stand as expressed by Muhammad Ishaque petitioner-accused. The statement of the Ahmad and the Stenographers were also recorded. Mr. Muhammad Ikram Civil Judge 1st Class/Magistrate Section 30 Faisalabad expressed his opinion that it is a case of passing of the illegal gratification and referred the matter to the Anti Corruption Establishment, Faisalabad where formal F.I.R. No.4 dated 26-5-1998 was registered under section 161/162/163/165/109 of the Pakistan Penal Code and under section 5 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947. Zahid Ali has also been booked alongwith Muhammad Ishaque petitioner accused. Muhammad Ishaque was arrested on 26-5-1998 whose bail plea has been rejected by the learned Special Judge, Anti-Corruption Faisalabad Division, Faisalabad and he has filed this petition before this Court to try his luck to be admitted to bail.

2. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned counsel for the State and gone through the record before me: The contentions of the learned counsel for Muhammad Ishaque petitioner are that sections 161, 163, 165 and 109 of the Pakistan Penal Code are bailable and that the offence under section 5 of the Prevention of Corruption. Act, 1947 does not fall with the prohibitory clause. He added that the statement of Muhamamd Zahid wino has been treated as a co-accused has made out that the amount of Rs.1,000 as not passed as the illegal gratification. On the contrary learned State counsel laid the emphasis that in the circumstances of the matter projected above Muhammad Ishaque petitioner is not entitled to the discretion of this Court as being a Naib Qasid he has brought bad name to the Court and that such a working deserves to be curbed with iron hand.

3. Without prejudice and without being disrespectful to Mr. Muhammad Akram, Civil Judge, 1st Class/Magistrate Section 30, Faisalabad I have to express that his working is responsible for the creation of the present situation. The bail application in a petty case of sections 406 and 420 of the Pakistan Penal Code was fixed before him which was heard on 28-4-1998, 29-4-1998 and 30-4-1998 and there cannot be any restraint on the impression of the litigant public which has to be controlled by the Presiding Officer through regular working and in such a manner which cannot be termed that of perfunctory nature. In case Iqbal Mahmood Ahmad was aware of the episode he should have intimated the Presiding Officer immediately and not on 2-5-1998. Same is my view with respect to Muhammad Ilyas and Abdul Rashid Stenographers. The silence on their part has made me to express that there was same bickering between the staff of the Court. It is better to express that little brooks make the river and the trend of aforesaid type of working of the complainant/learned Presiding Officer shall play the part in routine even in future if not altered/changed by him. Keeping in view the statement of Muhammad Zahid, it can safely be expressed that the involvement of Muhammad Ishaque is a question of further inquiry who, even otherwise, is entitled to be admitted to bail as the offence under section 5 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947 does not fall within the prohibitory clause. It shall not be out of place to express that the bail cannot be disallowed as a punishment only on the ground that the complainant is a learned Presiding Officer of a civil/criminal Court about whose working I have made my observations with hesitation.

4. Mr. Muhammad Ikram, Civil Judge 1st Class/Magistrate section 30, Faisalabad should streamline his working to avoid such a situation in future and obviously should show his control on his staff.

5. Finding it to be a fit case I accept .this application and admit Muhammad Ishaque petitioner-accused to bail in the sum of Rs.10,000 (Rupees(( Ten Thousand only) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Deputy Registrar (judicial) of this Court who after attestation of the bail bond etc. shall send the same to the learned Special Judge Anti-Corruption Faisalabad for addition of the same to the file after the submission of the challan.

6. A copy of this order shall be sent to the learned District Judge Faisalabad to bring the same to the notice of all of his subordinates so that such an incident does not occur in future.

7. A copy of this order shall also be sent to Mr. Muhammad Ikram, Civil Judge 1st Class/Magistrate section 30 Faisalabad so that he is able to go through the same and to streamline his working with regularity expected from a seasoned Judicial Officer of his rank. N.H.Q./M-705/L Bail granted