P L D 2012 Sindh 461 (PLP)
Inspector MUHAMMAD BASIR KHAN — Applicant Versus MANAGER, ALLIED BANK, KARACHI and 2 others — Respondents
| Citation | P L D 2012 Sindh 461 (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | High Court |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | Inspector MUHAMMAD BASIR KHAN — Applicant Versus MANAGER, ALLIED BANK, KARACHI and 2 others — Respondents |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in P L D 2012 Sindh 461 (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 P L D 2012 Sindh 461 (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the High Court bench comprising: N/A.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: P L D 2012 Sindh 461 (PLP) (Inspector MUHAMMAD BASIR KHAN — Applicant Versus MANAGER, ALLIED BANK, KARACHI and 2 others — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Heard Mr. Saleem Akhtar, Additional Prosecutor General, Sindh for the applicant/State, assisted by Mr. Shoukat H. Zubedi, Advocate for complainant and Mr. Muhram G. Balouch, Advocate for the accused.
- Mr. Shoukat H. Zubedi, Advocate for the Complainant added his legal expertise by advancing his arguments that the prayer made in the application is necessary for the purpose of investigation and this Court under section 94(1)(b), Cr.P.C. may grant permission to open the lockers where gold ornaments are lying and sanction of the court is required in determining the guilt or otherwise of the accused.
- On the other hand, contention of the learned Counsel for the accused is that the question of opening lockers and details of the accounts may be ascertained during trial and the permission as sought if allowed shall certainly prejudice the defence. In support of his contention learned Counsel placed reliance on Indian case reported as AIR 1965 Supreme Court 1251 wherein it was held that section 94 confers on a Court powers to issue summons and on a Police Officer to make an order to any person demanding production of a document or a thing believed to be in possession of that person. In rebuttal, learned Prosecutor contends that section 91 of Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 of India shall be attracted which does not confer any right on the accused to produce documents in his possession to prove his defence, therefore, the Indian case shall not help the version of the advocate for the accused.
Headnotes / Summary
Ss. 94, 102 & 561-A
Permission sought for opening bank lockers of accused
Case property lying in bank locker belonging to accused
Scope
Accused was alleged to have committed robbery and allegedly deposited the robbed items and cash in different bank accounts and lockers
Investigation Officer through present application requested opening of said lockers, so that investigation could be completed
Contentions of accused were that question of opening of bank lockers and details of the accounts might be ascertained during trial and that permission for opening of lockers would prejudice his defence
Necessity to open the locker and to ascertain the complete statement of accused would have to be seen with reference to the investigation
Police had the power to seize any property which might be found under circumstance, creating reasons of commission of an offence
Property lying in a locker or in bank account of accused was case property within the meaning of S.102, Cr.P.C, and nothing would prevent the police from seizing or recovering case property in the course of investigation, particularly assets which had direct link with the commission of the offence
Application was allowed and permission for opening of lockers was granted.
Judgment & Decree
SYED MUHAMMAD FAROOQ SHAH, J.
Inspector Muhammad Basir Khan of Police Station Ferozabad, Karachi has filed this application with the following prayers: "(a) That the case property approximately 3 k.g. of Gold is lying in locker No.157, having Key No..143 of Standard Chartered Bank, Gohar Plaza, Supply Road Branch (Branch Code No.172) is under the authority of respondent No.3, as such it is prayed that necessary direction may be given to respondent No.03 to issue permission to Manager of Standard Chartered Bank, Gohar Plaza Branch to allow Investigation Officer of the instant case to open the locker No.157 and further to proceed according to law to complete the investigation. (b) It is further prayed that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to direct/order to respondents to provide complete details of the account along with transactions and complete statement of accounts of the following:-- (i) A/c No.0977-0100-13501 Allied Bank, Khalid Bin Walid Road Branch, Karachi. (ii) A/c No.08157645001 Standard Chartered Bank, Model Colony Branch, Karachi (ii) A/c No.142346-301 My Bank, Urdu Bazar Branch, Karachi Prayer is the made in the interest of justice." Heard Mr. Saleem Akhtar, Additional Prosecutor General, Sindh for the applicant/State, assisted by Mr. Shoukat H. Zubedi, Advocate for complainant and Mr. Muhram G. Balouch, Advocate for the accused. After going through the statement of the accused, statement of his father recorded under section 161, Cr.P.C. and victim Aqsa, the learned Prosecutor contended that sufficient iota of evidence collected by the prosecution to establish that the accused has opened locker and bank accounts after committing robbery. The accused has admitted that the golden articles were deposited in locker No.157 having branch code 172 at Standard Chartered Bank, Supply Bazar, Gohar Plaze Branch Abbottabad and further disclosed that an amount of approximately 18 lacs was deposited in the account No.08157645001 at SCB, Model Colony Branch, Karachi. He has further disclosed that Rs.11 lacs has also deposited in account No.0977-0100-13501, Allied Bank, Khalid Bin Waleed Branch, Karachi and handsome amount was also deposited in Account No.142346-301 of My Bank (Summit Bank) Urdu Bazar Branch, Karachi. The applicant, being investigation officer required the detail of those amount and also required to open the locker, so that investigation be completed within stipulated time and would be in a position to submit challan before the trial court. The captioned application filed under section 129, Cr.P.C. is supported along with affidavit of the applicant/I.O. and along with relevant annexures as well. Mr. Shoukat H. Zubedi, Advocate for the Complainant added his legal expertise by advancing his arguments that the prayer made in the application is necessary for the purpose of investigation and this Court under section 94(1)(b), Cr.P.C. may grant permission to open the lockers where gold ornaments are lying and sanction of the court is required in determining the guilt or otherwise of the accused. On the other hand, contention of the learned Counsel for the accused is that the question of opening lockers and details of the accounts may be ascertained during trial and the permission as sought if allowed shall certainly prejudice the defence. In support of his contention learned Counsel placed reliance on Indian case reported as AIR 1965 Supreme Court 1251 wherein it was held that section 94 confers on a Court powers to issue summons and on a Police Officer to make an order to any person demanding production of a document or a thing believed to be in possession of that person. In rebuttal, learned Prosecutor contends that section 91 of Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 of India shall be attracted which does not confer any right on the accused to produce documents in his possession to prove his defence, therefore, the Indian case shall not help the version of the advocate for the accused. Suffice to say that the necessity to open the locker and to ascertain the complete statement of accused to accused would have to be seen with reference to the investigation under the criminal procedure as the police officer has the power to seize any property which may be found under circumstance, creating reasons to the commission of an offence. The property lying in a locker or in bank account of accused is case property within the meaning of section 102 and nothing prevent the police officer to seize or recover the case property in course of investigation, particularly the assets have direct links with the commission of the offence. In the result, the application is allowed as prayed for. MWA/M-85/K Application allowed.