2013 PLP 1631 (YLR)

SHAHID HAMEED DAR, J.

Through this single order I intend to dispose of four bail applications, separately moved by accused Asghar Ali (Criminal Miscellaneous No.18365-B of 2012), Abdul Waheed (Criminal Miscellaneous No.18016-B of 2012), Mehboob Elahi (Criminal Miscellaneous No.17396-B of 2012) and accused Asghar Ali (Criminal Miscellaneous No.17913-B of 2012), as they all stood arrested in case F.I.R. No.596/1012 dated 9-10-2012 registered for an offence under section 462-B, P.P.C. at Police Station Nishat Abad (Faisalabad).

2. Precisely, the prosecution case as narrated by Ahmad Masood Sheikh, Admn. Officer, PARCO is that Pak Arab Refinery Limited is a joint operation/venture between Government of Pakistan and Abu Dhabi for supply of oil (petroleum products) from Karachi to Sheikhupura through underground pipelines, which makes backbone of the economy of the country; for some weeks a noticeable decline in pressure of oil, prompted him and his colleagues to patrol the area and for this purpose a separate patrolling team was constituted to keep a check on oil-pipelines; he along with security-officer Major Fayyaz Ahmad patrolled the area at about 2-00 a.m. on 9-10-2012 and suspected some foul-play in the building of a nearby hotel and a few residential houses; they approached the said hotel and on seeing them, the hotel-staff slipped away; they checked the spot and unearthed a tunnel measuring 180 ft. which was dug by the oil-mafia to steal oil from the main pipeline; the apparatus used by the accused for pilfering oil was taken into possession by them; on inquiry he (complainant) learnt that it was Zafar Chhina accused, who rented out the hotel to Shamim and Saleem accused under the guarantee of Faisal accused (petitioner); the offence of pilferage of oil from main pipeline was committed by Mehboob (petitioner) and Touseef along with aforementioned Saleem and Faisal accused; seven more (unknown) were also suspected of oil-theft.

3. Asghar Ali (petitioner) and Abdul Waheed (petitioner) were named as accused through supplementary statement of the complainant, rendered by him on 18-10-2012 whereby), he also nominated ten others as accused without disclosing the source of his knowledge. Mehboob Elahi (petitioner) and Faisal Rasul (petitioner), however, stood nominated in the F.I.R. as accused.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners one after the other has contended that case of the petitioners is at par with that of Muhammad Akram accused who was granted post-arrest bail by this Court vide order dated 26-11-2012, passed in Writ Petition No.27919 of 2012 which was converted into a post-arrest bail application and decided as such; accused Mahboob Elahi and Faisal Rasul were found innocent during the course of investigation by more than one Investigating Officer as complainant failed to produce any connecting evidence against them during the course of investigation; the investigating officer prepared discharge-report in respect of both the accused by showing them innocent but it was disagreed to by the learned Area Magistrate vide order dated 2-11-2012; accused Asghar and Abdul Waheed have also been involved without any incriminatory material against them and they appear to have been labelled as suspects; the alleged recovery of cash Rs.2,80,000 at the instance of Abdul Waheed accused is a fake piece of evidence which has been planted upon him by the I.O. to strengthen the prosecution case; accused Asghar is not named in the F.I.R. like his co-accused, Abdul Waheed and his implication in this case smacks malicious-ness and dishonesty on the part of the complainant.

5. On the other hand, learned Addl. Prosecutor-General Punjab opposes with the contention that the accused/petitioners have committed a heinous offence as they incurred huge monitory loss to the economy of the country through their illegal act; the offence, committed by the petitioners is heinous, hence, they may not be granted the relief prayed for.

6. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and perusing the record, it is observed that allegation against the petitioners, per se looks heinous and not less than an act of terrorism but, it is a badly investigated case, which has been spoilt by the Investigating Officer in more than one way, vis-a-vis no evidence has been collected as to when the mentioned hotel was let out to the tenants/accused, Shameem and Saleem; when, where and in what manner accused Faisal stood guarantee on behalf of above said tenants; why supplementary statement of the complainant was so delayed and why did it not contain any element of reasonableness or persuasiveness; why evidence of recovery of certain articles, as shown against the accused looked queer and unconvincing; why the senior hierarchy of the police felt not the subtleness of the matter and why the quality of investigation remained hopelessly poor. While admitting Muhammad Akram, a co-accused of the petitioner to post arrest bail, certain observations were made by this Court which are advantageously reproduced hereunder:- "...it is found that the petitioner's name figured as an accused of this case, for the first time on 18-10-2012 through a supple-mentary statement of the complainant who despite being an educated person, did not opt to disclose the source through which he learnt his name as one of the unknown accused. The buildings which were connected through illegal pipelines for oil-theft did not belong to the petitioner. No evidence has been collected by the Investigating Officer as to whether the petitioner was ever seen at the spot along with his co-accused. The evidence of recovery of cash Rs.10,000 is of joint character. The arrest of the petitioner on 3-11-2012, as claimed by the petitioner is a controversial circumstance, keeping in view the proceedings conducted by the learned Sessions Judge, Faisalabad in a habeas corpus petition filed by Muhammad Anwar, the brother of the petitioner, for the recovery of Muhammad Akram (petitioner) from the unlawful custody of the police. The dubiousness hovering over the arrest of the petitioner has been discussed in detail in order dated 19-11-2012 passed in the titled' constitutional petition, whereby, the petitioner; on having been produced from the prison, was set at liberty as an ad-interim arrangement. Though the allegation contained in the F.I.R. is serious yet, the incriminating evidence against the petitioner is equally deficient. Plainly speaking it is a badly investigated case with a touch of incompetence and unscrupulousness on the part of the police. Sufficient reasons exist to believe that the petitioner's case calls for further probe into his guilt within the meaning of section 497(2) Cr.P.C...". Of the four petitioners two, namely Abdul Waheed and Asghar Ali were nominated through his supplementary statement recorded on 18-10-2012, by the complainant who did not like to disclose the source of his knowledge which prompted him, to name them as accused. A cash-amount of Rs.2,80,000 was allegedly got recovered by Abdul Waheed accused but recovery-memos depict a sorry state of affairs as it shows an indirect recovery of the said amount, having been managed by some relatives of the accused. The recovery of Suzuki pick-up/van by accused/petitioner Asghar on 22-10-2012 is also a haphazard circumstance, which lends a very little corroboration to the F.I.R.-case. The incompetence, unscrupulousness and witlessness of the investigating officer has badly marred the veracity of accusations against the accused. The petitioners' case plainly assimilates the case of their co-accused Muhammad Akram, who, as mentioned above, was granted bail by this Court on 26-11-2012. Following the dictum of consistency, the petitioners are also admitted to post-arrest bail, subject to furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs.2,00,000 each with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of learned trial Court. MWA/F-13/L Bail granted.