MLD 2008

2008 PLP 257 (MLD)

ABDUL QADIR TAWAKKAL — Petitioner Versus CHAIRMAN NATIONAL ACCOUNTABILITY BUREAU, ISLAMABAD — Respondent

Jurisdiction / Court
Karachi
Decided Date
2007-August-9
Honorable Judges
N/A
Case Reference Summary (AEO Optimized)
Citation 2008 PLP 257 (MLD)
Forum / Court Karachi
Bench Members N/A
Parties ABDUL QADIR TAWAKKAL — Petitioner Versus CHAIRMAN NATIONAL ACCOUNTABILITY BUREAU, ISLAMABAD — Respondent
Primary Law Constitution of Pakistan (1973)
💡 Quick Legal QA & Summary / سوال و جواب خلاصہ
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2008 PLP 257 (MLD)?

This judgment primarily cites: Constitution of Pakistan (1973) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.

Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2008 PLP 257 (MLD)?

The case was heard and decided by the Karachi bench comprising: N/A.

Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?

Cite this legal precedent as: 2008 PLP 257 (MLD) (ABDUL QADIR TAWAKKAL — Petitioner Versus CHAIRMAN NATIONAL ACCOUNTABILITY BUREAU, ISLAMABAD — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.

Laws Cited

Constitution of Pakistan (1973)

Representation

  • ----Art.199---Constitutional petitioner---Bail, grant of---Complainant in his F.I.R. had alleged that Company had sold the hypotheticated goods in respect of the loan advanced to them---Counsel for petitioner had stated that petitioner being neither Director nor Chairman nor Executive Officer of said Company was not involved in the case and that petitioner was not responsible for actions conducted by his sons and other Directors of the Company---Initially when the matter was under investigation, petitioner was granted bail by the Special Court (Offences in Banks) at `L' and said bail granting order had not been cancelled; however, after submission of challan, in the present proceedings petitioner was shown in custody as he was involved in other cases---Petitioner, admittedly was neither Chairman nor Director nor Executive of the Company---Petitioner, in circumstances was entitled to the concession of bail.
  • Shahab Sarik for Petitioner.
  • The learned Advocate for the petitioner has stated that the petitioner was neither Director nor Chairman nor Executive Officer of Naya Daur Motors Limited, therefore, he is not involved in the case; that the petitioner is not responsible for actions conducted by his sons and other Directors of NDML, therefore, he is entitled to the concession of bail.

Headnotes / Summary

Art.199

Constitutional petitioner

Bail, grant of

Complainant in his F.I.R. had alleged that Company had sold the hypotheticated goods in respect of the loan advanced to them

Counsel for petitioner had stated that petitioner being neither Director nor Chairman nor Executive Officer of said Company was not involved in the case and that petitioner was not responsible for actions conducted by his sons and other Directors of the Company

Initially when the matter was under investigation, petitioner was granted bail by the Special Court (Offences in Banks) at `L' and said bail granting order had not been cancelled; however, after submission of challan, in the present proceedings petitioner was shown in custody as he was involved in other cases

Petitioner, admittedly was neither Chairman nor Director nor Executive of the Company

Petitioner, in circumstances was entitled to the concession of bail.

Judgment & Decree

RAHMAT HUSAIN JAFFERI, J.

Brief facts giving rise to the present petition are that Tariq Akhtar Khan. Vice-President Zonal Chief, National Bank of Pakistan, M.A. Jinnah Road Branch, Karachi lodged F.I.R. at Police Station FIA STD Islamabad by alleging that Naya Daur Motors Limited (NDML) had sold the hypothecated goods in respect of the loan advanced to them. Initially, the case was investigated by FIA Islamabad. The petitioner moved an application for grant of bail before the Special Court (Offences in Banks) at Lahore, where the petitioner was granted bail vide order, dated 20-3-1997. After investigation it appears that the case was challaned before the Special Court (Offences in Banks) at Karachi, from where the case was transferred to the Accountability Court at Karachi. The learned Advocate for the petitioner has stated that the petitioner was neither Director nor Chairman nor Executive Officer of Naya Daur Motors Limited, therefore, he is not involved in the case; that the petitioner is not responsible for actions conducted by his sons and other Directors of NDML, therefore, he is entitled to the concession of bail. The learned D.P.G.A. for N.A.B. has stated that there is sufficient evidence collected against the petitioner, as Tawakkal 'Group of Companies was controlling Naya Daur Motors Limited; that the petitioner was Chairman of the Twakkal Group of Companies; that the P.W.4 Maqsood Ahmed Qureshi in his deposition has admitted that the petitioner, Farooq Twakkal and Noor Tawakkal were managing Naya Daur Motors Limited, however, he has admitted that the petitioner was neither Chairman nor Director or Executive Officer of NDML. We have given due consideration to the arguments, gone through the material available on the record and found that initially when the matter was under investigation the petitioner was granted bail by the Special Court (Offences in Banks) at Lahore. It appears that so far the bail order has not been cancelled by any Court. However, after the submission of challan at Karachi, petitioner was shown in custody, as he was involved in other cases. In the present case it is an admitted position that the petitioner is neither Chairman nor Director nor Executive Officer of NDML. The learned D.P.G.A. has drawn our attention to the evidence of P. W.4 Maqsood Ahmed Qureshi recorded by the Accountability Court Karachi, in which the witness, who was the Finance Director of NDML, admitted that the management of the said company was run by Abdul Qadir Tawakkal, Fareed Tawakkal, Farooq Tawakkal, Noor Muhammad Tawakkal and Saleem Ibrahim Kapoorwala. He was cross-examined by the defence counsel, in which he admitted that he could not produce any document showing Abdul Qadir Tawakkal as Chairman of NDML. The prosecution also examined Sidney Pereira, Deputy Registrar of Companies. He categorically stated that the record did not show that the petitioner Abdul Qadir Tawakkal was the Chairman or Executive Officer or Shareholder of NDML. He had given the names of the Directors of the various companies including NDML. He produced relevant documents which also do not show the name of Abdul Qadir Tawakkal. In view of the above position, we are of the view that the petitioner is entitled to the concession of bail, therefore, bail is granted to him in the sum of Rs.500,000 (Rupees five Lac) on furnishing solvent surety with P.R. Bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Nazir of this Court. The petition is allowed. H.B.T./A-127/K Bail granted.