2004 P Cr (PLP)

Accused Mir Faiz Muhammad Talpur is facing trial under sections 420, 469, 272, 473‑and 471, P.P.C. in Crime No.161 of 2003 of Police Station Shahdadpur in the Court of Additional Sessions Judge, Shahdadpur.

2. Briefly, the prosecution story as narrated by complainant Assistant Mukhtiarkar and Sub‑Treasury Officer Taluka Shahdadpur is that on 30‑9‑2003 he received a telephonic message of Mr. Riaz, the Accountant of District Accounts Officer, Sanghar that present applicant Fiaz Muhammad had got a voucher passed for an amount of Rs.15,27,000 of Land Acquisition Officer, Shahdadpur and the same may be passed after the verification. The complainant called clerk Rana Muhammad Shafiq of Deputy District Officer, Shahdadpur and Land Acquisition Officer, Shahdadpur who disclosed that no such voucher was issued from their office. Verification was made by Deputy. District Officer and in the meantime Rana Muhammad Shafiq told the complainant that present applicant belongs to gang of cheaters and his custody may be handed over to police.

3. At about 2‑30 p.m. Mir Faiz Muhammad came to the complainant when Clerk Malik Pervez Ahmed and Manzoor Ahmed Abro were sitting with him. Applicant produced bogus Voucher No.207, dated 13‑9‑2003 of Rs.15,27,000 with forged stamps and a bill in respect of preparation of forged stamps typed in English, so that he may be able to, withdraw the amount soon after checking the voucher on verification. It was found fabricated and forged. The accused as well as voucher and the letter of complainant were produced before police and the F.I.R. was registered.

4. It is argued by Mr. Bhat that it is yet to be established as to whether the voucher recovered from applicant was forged or genuine. He submits that the offence with which the accused has been charged does not come within the prohibitory clause contained under section 497(1), Cr.P.C. The accused has been implicated due to enmity. Benefit of reasonable doubt may be extended to the applicant.

5. Mr. Rasheed A. Qureshi learned Assistant Advocate‑General has opposed the bail plea of accused. Prosecution case has been supported by complainant Abdul Karim P. Ws. District Accounts Officer, Sanghar, Clerk Pervez Ahmed and Manzoor Ahmed.

6. Admittedly forged and fabricated voucher was recovered from the possession of accused. A fabricated letter with a forged stamp was also recovered from his possession in presence of Mashirs namely Piyar Ali and Gul Rahar. Subsequently the accused led the police party to his house wherefrom he produced certain articles including stamps for preparing the forged and fabricated documents, that material was also recovered in presence of same Mashirs.

7. In this view of the matter, sufficient material is available on record to show prima facie that the applicant is involved in the commission of the offence. The offence with which he stands charged is covered by prohibitory clause contained under section 497(1), Cr.P.C. The bail plea of accused stands rejected. H.B.T./M‑53/K Bail refused.