1988 P Cr (PLP)

‑‑‑S. 497‑‑Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss.420, 468, 471 & 109‑‑ Prevention of Corruption Act (II of 1947), S.5(2)‑‑Bail, grant of‑ Accused beneficiary of statement made by imposter and prima facie guilty of committing offence with which they were charged‑‑Accused, held, not entitled to concession of bail‑‑Bail refused. Muhammad Siddiq Chughtai for Petitioners. Najmul Hasan Gill for the State. Shahbaz real uncle of Talib Hussain, Khadim Hussain, Sadiq Hussain and Baqir, petitioners got about 31 Kanals of Government's land in Chak No.37‑38/4‑L, District Okara. It appears that they claimed to have purchased this land from Shahbaz. The petitioners in collusion with village Lambardar Chiragh, petitioner No.5 prepared a plan to get this land transferred in their own name by obtaining the necessary permission from GAR District Okara and in pursuance of this plan, they produced some person before the Collector on 30‑8‑1986 who personated as Shahbaz and stated that he wanted to sell out his share of land i.e. 31 kanals and 3 marlas in Khewat No.78, Khatoni Nos.335 to 343 to petitioners Nos. 1 to 4 as he needed money, therefore, he be granted permission under section 19 of Colonization of Government Lands Act, 1912. The same day petitioners Nos.l to 4 also made similar statements claiming themselves to be the purchasers of land and Chiragh Ali petitioner No.5 identified the parties having appeared before the GAR as genuine. This plan came to the notice of Shahbaz when he applied to the Collector, Okara, for transferring his land to her daughter and Talib Hussain petitioner appearing there claimed that Shahbaz had already sold his land (in question) to them for Rs.90,000 and made a statement to this effect before the GAR on 30‑8‑1986. At this thumb‑impression of Shahbaz was sent to finger experts bureau which reported that the thumb‑impression affixed on the statement dated 30‑8‑1986 is not that of Shahbaz. At this the Collector got instant case registered at 'A' Division Police Station. The petitioners have been arrested and. refused bail by the lower Court, hence this petition.

2. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the State and also perused the record.

3. Petitioners Nos.1 to 4 are real nephews of Shahbaz. The record shows that the person who appeared before the GAR on 30‑8‑1986 for obtaining permission to alienate his property personating himself A as Shahbaz was dishonestly and fraudulently produced by the petitioners who definitely know that the person appearing there, was not their uncle but an imposeor. So, they being the beneficiary of the statement made by the said impostor are prima facie guilty of committing offence with which they are charged. Similarly, Chiragh Lambardar knowingly identified the impostor as Shahbaz before GAR. In the circumstances, I find that they are not entitled to the grant of concession of bail at this stage. The petition is accordingly dismissed, however, they shall be at liberty to move the proper forum as and when some new ground becomes available to them in normal course of events. M.Y.H./T‑23/L Bail refused.