P L D 1985 Lahore 590 (PLP)

S. 498-Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss. 420, 468 & 471-Offences in Respect of Banks (Special Courts) Ordinance (IX of 1984), S. 5 (6)-Bail before arrest-An extraordinary remedy in extraordinary situations-Essential condition for remedy of bail before arrest ; existence of malice or ulterior motives either on part of police or complainant to arrest accused or to have him arrested for purpose of putting him to indignity-Essential condition not satisfied-Bail before arrest refused. Saleem Mahmood Chahal for Petitioners: JUDGMENT This is an application for pre-arrest bail by Riaz Mahmood Bajwa and Malik Talib Russain in case F.1.R. No. 147/84 of F. LA. Lahore, registered for offences under sections 420, 468 and 471, P. P. C. The said petitioners were granted interim pre-arrest bail by my order dated 18-6-1985. The case has come up for hearing as a notice case today. 2. The case is one of fraudulent withdrawal in 1977 of a sum of Rs. 31,300 from Account No. S. B. 1697 of one Muhammad Aslam Khan in Habib Bank Ltd., G. T. Road Branch, Gujranwala, through four forged cheques by making use of blank cheques from a cheque book, containing Cheques Nos. 512671-512680 of Account No. 3932 of Mirza Noman Beg minor whose mother (who was actually operating the said account on behalf of her said minor son) had left the said cheque book in the bank after withdrawal of a sum of Rs. 500 from the said account. 3. Said Muhammad Aslam Khan had, through a branch of Habib Bank Limited in England, opened Account No. 1697 in 1972 from England where he was employed, with an initial remittance of Rs. 23,218.92. He had been issued cheque book containing Cheques Nos. 033861-033870. The said sum had by the beginning of 1977 swelled to an amount of Rs. 31,300 approximately. 4.- The first circumstance against accused petitioners lciaz Mahmood Bajwa and Malik Tabb Hussain, respectively 11nd and IIIrd officers in Habib Bank Ltd., G. T. Road Branch, Gujranwala, is that they passed four forged cheques although two of the said cheques contained obvious defacement of original account number by spreading blue ink over it and its replacement by a new account number subsequently added and the other two contained manifest overwriting of the new account number over the previously written account number. These multations were visible to the naked eye and being of sensational nature .appear to be sufficient to have raised suspicion in the mind of the said officers and yet they passed the said four cheques. 5. Then there is the further circumstance of the said four cheques having been passed by the accused-officers, one after the other within a short span of 14 days which appears to exclude possibility of inadvertent mistake or even mere negligence on the part of the accused officers and prima facie shows design and deliberation on their part. 6. Third circumstance in that connection is that the accusedpetitioners passed the cheques in spite of obvious alteration of account number and addition of new number on all the four cheques without raising any finger, allegedly on account of existence of initials appearing to them to be of the Manager Rashid Ahmad (who, however, by implication denied before the police on 20-10-1984 that said initials were his) without making any enquiry from Rashid Ahmad as indicated in police file although. the crude replacement of account number on the cheques was suffcient to put them on their guard in respect of genuineness of the said initials and the genuineness of the cheques and new account number on them. Furthermore, it is given in police file that the initials of accused Riaz Mahmood Bajwa were just the same as were available on the alterations of cheques and possibility could not be excluded of his having put initials on alterations on said cheques to avoid his and his colleagues apprehension by taking protection under the plea that they had accepted the said alterations of account number as genuine on seeing the initials of Rashid Ahmad Manager. 7. Before passing the cheque, supervision of each cheque has to be done by the officers with reference to the ledger account of the accountholder. On the ledger sheet relating to Account No. 1697 of Muhammad Adam Khan, there is a specific entry in a regular column meant for it of cheque book containing Cheques Nos. 033861-033870, issued to Muhammad Aslam Khan, against regular red ink signature of an officer issuing the said cheque book and another entry under it of another Cheque Book No 512671-512680 (cheque book left by the mother of Mirza Noman Peg in the bank) without any such signature against it. Moreover, in the said ledger, there was no entry of cheques or even one cheque from 1st cheque book having been utilized by Muhammad Aslam Khan for withdrawal of money. The accused officer passed the cheque on the basis of cheques from the other cheque book seeing and fully knowing that later entry of second cheque book in the ledger was not verified try any officer for its correctness by appending his signature to the same and the cheques they were passing were from an unauthorised cheque book entered on the ledger sheet fraudulently. 8. The two accused officers passed the cheques by comparing the signatures thereon with two forged signatures of Muhammad Aslam Khan (as M.A. Khan) on a forged requisition slip called Form 'A', which signatures were not verified by any officer by appending his signature thereto and axing on it stamp of verification and not by comparing the signatures on said cheques with specimen signature of Muhammad Aslam Khan in the genuine account opening form. The said forged requisition slip appears to have been smuggled into the bank record dishonestly in order to show that Cbeque Book 512671-512680 had been issued to Muhammad Aslam Khan holder of Account No. 1697 although the said cheque book was of Mirza Noman Beg, minor mentioned above. 9. The above pieces of circumstantial evidence were sufficient to mak the police believe that the accused officers were concerned with the offence of fraudulent withdrawal of money from the bank on the basis of said four forged cheques. If, therefore, the police wants to arrest the accused, it is not on account of any mala fides on their part or on the part of the complainant bank for the purposes of disgracing the accused persons or having them disgraced. Their desire to arrest the accused persons stems from the above pieces of circumstantial evidence which appear, at this stage, to implicate the accused-petitioners in the crime committed in the bank. 10. Bail before arrest is an extraordinary remedy in extraordinary) situations. The essential condition for the remedy of bail before arrest is the existence of malice or ulterior motives either on the part of the police or the complainant to arrest the accused or to have him arrested for the purpose of putting him to indignity. That essential condition is not satisfied in this case. I, therefore, reject this application for pre-arrest bail and recall my order dated 18-6-1985, granting the petitioners interim prearrest bail. M. A. K.????????? Petition dismissed. Saleem Mahmood Chahal for Petitioners: This is an application for pre-arrest bail by Riaz Mahmood Bajwa and Malik Talib Russain in case F.1.R. No. 147/84 of F. LA. Lahore, registered for offences under sections 420, 468 and 471, P. P. C. The said petitioners were granted interim pre-arrest bail by my order dated 18-6-1985. The case has come up for hearing as a notice case today. 2. The case is one of fraudulent withdrawal in 1977 of a sum of Rs. 31,300 from Account No. S. B. 1697 of one Muhammad Aslam Khan in Habib Bank Ltd., G. T. Road Branch, Gujranwala, through four forged cheques by making use of blank cheques from a cheque book, containing Cheques Nos. 512671-512680 of Account No. 3932 of Mirza Noman Beg minor whose mother (who was actually operating the said account on behalf of her said minor son) had left the said cheque book in the bank after withdrawal of a sum of Rs. 500 from the said account. 3. Said Muhammad Aslam Khan had, through a branch of Habib Bank Limited in England, opened Account No. 1697 in 1972 from England where he was employed, with an initial remittance of Rs. 23,218.92. He had been issued cheque book containing Cheques Nos. 033861-033870. The said sum had by the beginning of 1977 swelled to an amount of Rs. 31,300 approximately. 4.- The first circumstance against accused petitioners lciaz Mahmood Bajwa and Malik Tabb Hussain, respectively 11nd and IIIrd officers in Habib Bank Ltd., G. T. Road Branch, Gujranwala, is that they passed four forged cheques although two of the said cheques contained obvious defacement of original account number by spreading blue ink over it and its replacement by a new account number subsequently added and the other two contained manifest overwriting of the new account number over the previously written account number. These multations were visible to the naked eye and being of sensational nature .appear to be sufficient to have raised suspicion in the mind of the said officers and yet they passed the said four cheques. 5. Then there is the further circumstance of the said four cheques having been passed by the accused-officers, one after the other within a short span of 14 days which appears to exclude possibility of inadvertent mistake or even mere negligence on the part of the accused officers and prima facie shows design and deliberation on their part. 6. Third circumstance in that connection is that the accusedpetitioners passed the cheques in spite of obvious alteration of account number and addition of new number on all the four cheques without raising any finger, allegedly on account of existence of initials appearing to them to be of the Manager Rashid Ahmad (who, however, by implication denied before the police on 20-10-1984 that said initials were his) without making any enquiry from Rashid Ahmad as indicated in police file although. the crude replacement of account number on the cheques was suffcient to put them on their guard in respect of genuineness of the said initials and the genuineness of the cheques and new account number on them. Furthermore, it is given in police file that the initials of accused Riaz Mahmood Bajwa were just the same as were available on the alterations of cheques and possibility could not be excluded of his having put initials on alterations on said cheques to avoid his and his colleagues apprehension by taking protection under the plea that they had accepted the said alterations of account number as genuine on seeing the initials of Rashid Ahmad Manager. 7. Before passing the cheque, supervision of each cheque has to be done by the officers with reference to the ledger account of the accountholder. On the ledger sheet relating to Account No. 1697 of Muhammad Adam Khan, there is a specific entry in a regular column meant for it of cheque book containing Cheques Nos. 033861-033870, issued to Muhammad Aslam Khan, against regular red ink signature of an officer issuing the said cheque book and another entry under it of another Cheque Book No 512671-512680 (cheque book left by the mother of Mirza Noman Peg in the bank) without any such signature against it. Moreover, in the said ledger, there was no entry of cheques or even one cheque from 1st cheque book having been utilized by Muhammad Aslam Khan for withdrawal of money. The accused officer passed the cheque on the basis of cheques from the other cheque book seeing and fully knowing that later entry of second cheque book in the ledger was not verified try any officer for its correctness by appending his signature to the same and the cheques they were passing were from an unauthorised cheque book entered on the ledger sheet fraudulently. 8. The two accused officers passed the cheques by comparing the signatures thereon with two forged signatures of Muhammad Aslam Khan (as M.A. Khan) on a forged requisition slip called Form 'A', which signatures were not verified by any officer by appending his signature thereto and axing on it stamp of verification and not by comparing the signatures on said cheques with specimen signature of Muhammad Aslam Khan in the genuine account opening form. The said forged requisition slip appears to have been smuggled into the bank record dishonestly in order to show that Cbeque Book 512671-512680 had been issued to Muhammad Aslam Khan holder of Account No. 1697 although the said cheque book was of Mirza Noman Beg, minor mentioned above. 9. The above pieces of circumstantial evidence were sufficient to mak the police believe that the accused officers were concerned with the offence of fraudulent withdrawal of money from the bank on the basis of said four forged cheques. If, therefore, the police wants to arrest the accused, it is not on account of any mala fides on their part or on the part of the complainant bank for the purposes of disgracing the accused persons or having them disgraced. Their desire to arrest the accused persons stems from the above pieces of circumstantial evidence which appear, at this stage, to implicate the accused-petitioners in the crime committed in the bank. 10. Bail before arrest is an extraordinary remedy in extraordinary) situations. The essential condition for the remedy of bail before arrest is the existence of malice or ulterior motives either on the part of the police or the complainant to arrest the accused or to have him arrested for the purpose of putting him to indignity. That essential condition is not satisfied in this case. I, therefore, reject this application for pre-arrest bail and recall my order dated 18-6-1985, granting the petitioners interim prearrest bail. M. A. K.????????? Petition dismissed.