2005 PLP 1666 (SCMR)
Aga JEHANZEB — Petitioner Versus N.A.B. and others — Respondents
| Citation | 2005 PLP 1666 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | Supreme Court of Pakistan |
| Bench Members | Sh. Riaz Ahmed, C.J. Mian Muhammad Ajmal and Muhammad Nawaz Abbasi, JJ |
| Parties | Aga JEHANZEB — Petitioner Versus N.A.B. and others — Respondents |
| Primary Law | Penal Code (XLV of 1860) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2005 PLP 1666 (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Penal Code (XLV of 1860) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2005 PLP 1666 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Supreme Court of Pakistan bench comprising: Sh. Riaz Ahmed, C.J. Mian Muhammad Ajmal and Muhammad Nawaz Abbasi, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2005 PLP 1666 (SCMR) (Aga JEHANZEB — Petitioner Versus N.A.B. and others — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Muhammad Farooq Bedar, Advocate Supreme Court, M. Naseem Kashmiri, Advocate Supreme Court and Ozair Chughtai, Advocate-on-Record (absent) for Petitioner.
- M. Ibrahim Satti, Advocate Supreme Court and Ms. Khatak, Advocate-on-Record for Respondents.
- Date of hearing: 7th April, 2003.
- 3. Mr. Muhammad Farooq Bedar, Advocate Supreme Court for the petitioner submits that petitioner was not named in the FIR., nor there exists any evidence to show his active involvement in the crime. The co-accused of the petitioner Arif Khokhar has already been granted bail by the High Court, therefore, following the rule of consistency, petitioner deserves the grant of bail. It was contended that petitioner is in continuous detention for the last about two years, and the trial is not in sight in near future, the complete challan has not been submitted so far and the prosecution has submitted a list of 83 witnesses to be examined besides voluminous documentary evidence.
- 4. Mr. M. Ibrahim Satti, Advocate Supreme Court for the NAB states that challan has been submitted, proceedings against absconders in terms of sections 87 and 88, Criminal Procedure Code have been completed, and the formal proclamation has also been issued against them and the period of two months is going to lapse on 2nd of May, 2003. It is stated that on that day charge will be framed and the trial would commence accordingly.
- 5. When questioned that under the NAB Ordinance trial is to conclude within 30 days. Mr. M. Ibrahim Satti, Advocate Supreme Court submitted that this time period is not mandatory but directory for the time being we would refrain from expressing any opinion as to whether the timeframe is mandatory or directory, but would direct that after submission of challan in this case on 7th of May, 2003 if the trial does not commence or conclude within 30 days from the said date, petitioner would automatically become entitled to the grant of bail subject to his furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs. five millions with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court at Lahore.
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from the order dated 27th of November, 2002 of the Lahore High Court in Writ Petition No-.17035 of 2002 and 17034 of 2002).
Ss. 406/420/467/468/471
Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art.185(3)
Petition for leave to appeal filed by accused had called in question order passed by High Court whereby Constitutional petition filed by accused seeking post-arrest bail was dismissed
Accused was in continuous detention for the last two years and trial of his case was not in sight in near future and complete challan had not yet been submitted and prosecution had submitted a list of 83 witnesses to be examined despite voluminous documentary evidence
Supreme Court directed that after submission of challan in Court, if trial of case would not commence or concluded within 30 days from date of submission of challan, accused would automatically become entitled to grant of bail.
Judgment & Decree
SH. RIAZ AHMED, C.J.
This petition for leave to appeal calls in question the order dated 27th of November, 2002 whereby a learned Division Bench of the Lahore High Court dismissed three writ petitions preferred on behalf of petitioner Aga Jehanzeb and two others seeking post-arrest bail in case F.I.R. No.130, dated 16th of March, 2001 registered with Police Station Civil Lines, Lahore, on charges under sections 406/420/467/468 and 471, Pakistan Penal Code with direction to the Investigating Agency to submit the challan before the trial Court within as fortnight and the latter to conclude the trial expeditiously, possibly on day to day basis.
2. It is alleged that (Aga Jehanzeb) petitioner who happened to an experienced banker had manoeuvred the fraud by purchasing stamp-paper for preparing the fake Bank guarantee and the same was handed over to Muhammad Arif Ijaz Khokhar, who subsequently entrusted the same to Muhammad Tanvir. It is stated that during the investigation, and amount of Rs.10,28,625 and 1,00,000 US dollar has been recovered from him. In addition thereto, it is stated that petitioner is also involved in case F.I.R. No.131, dated 16th of March, 2001 registered with Police Station Civil Lines, Lahore on charges under sections 406/420/467/468/461, Pakistan Penal Code. In this criminal case, it is stated that petitioner had dishonestly obtained financial facility to the tune of Rs.208 million from the Emirates Bank causing wrongful loss to the bank. It is alleged that petitioner had received his share of Rs.68,00,000 through cheque.
3. Mr. Muhammad Farooq Bedar, Advocate Supreme Court for the petitioner submits that petitioner was not named in the FIR., nor there exists any evidence to show his active involvement in the crime. The co-accused of the petitioner Arif Khokhar has already been granted bail by the High Court, therefore, following the rule of consistency, petitioner deserves the grant of bail. It was contended that petitioner is in continuous detention for the last about two years, and the trial is not in sight in near future, the complete challan has not been submitted so far and the prosecution has submitted a list of 83 witnesses to be examined besides voluminous documentary evidence.
4. Mr. M. Ibrahim Satti, Advocate Supreme Court for the NAB states that challan has been submitted, proceedings against absconders in terms of sections 87 and 88, Criminal Procedure Code have been completed, and the formal proclamation has also been issued against them and the period of two months is going to lapse on 2nd of May, 2003. It is stated that on that day charge will be framed and the trial would commence accordingly.
5. When questioned that under the NAB Ordinance trial is to conclude within 30 days. Mr. M. Ibrahim Satti, Advocate Supreme Court submitted that this time period is not mandatory but directory for the time being we would refrain from expressing any opinion as to whether the timeframe is mandatory or directory, but would direct that after submission of challan in this case on 7th of May, 2003 if the trial does not commence or conclude within 30 days from the said date, petitioner would automatically become entitled to the grant of bail subject to his furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs. five millions with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court at Lahore. Both petitions disposed of. H.B.T./J-5/S Order accordingly.