2021 PLP 1546 (MLD)

CH. ABDUL AZIZ, J.

Mohammad Sarfraz Ansari (petitioner) seeks bail after arrest in case FIR No.35 dated 07.08.2020 registered under sections 420, 468, 471, 109, 409, P.P.C. read with section 5(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947, at Police Station FIA Anti-Corruption Circle Islamabad.

2. Succinctly stated the case of prosecution as it gleans from the crime report is to the effect that Waqar Aslam (co-accused) in active connivance with officers/officials of Controller Military Accounts (CMA) fraudulently withdrew an amount of Rs.52,254,074/- through fake bills of Central Ordnance Depot, Rawalpindi; that the afore-said amount was deceitfully withdrawn through thirty three fake bills, in favour of four firms and deposited in five different bank accounts of these firms, which were in the name of Waqar Aslam (co-accused), during March-April, 2020; that it is further transpired during enquiry that eight more fake bills amounting to Rs.14,076,400/- claimed in favour of M/S Abdullah Enterprises, a firm also owned by Waqar Aslam (co-accused), were withheld by CMA and that currently an amount of Rs.52,254,074/- was dishonestly withdrawn.

3. Arguments heard and record perused.

4. It is discernible from the tentative perusal of record that the case in hand pertains to a deceptive transaction whereby through fake and bogus bills hefty amount of approximately Rs.52.000 Million was withdrawn from the office of CMA. The modus operandi adopted for the execution of fraud is to the effect that firms were got registered in the name of Waqar Aslam (co-accused) by a bunch of cheaters, including the petitioner and through fake bills afore-mentioned amount was withdrawn from the CMA.

5. The tenure of fraud is ranging from 2018 to 2020 and noticeably the petitioner is not nominated in the crime report which was registered on 07.08.2020. This Court is mindful of the fact that the case is of white-collar crime. The term "white collar crime" is overwhelmingly characterized by deceit, concealment, or violation of trust. Needless to mention here that offence of deception is always committed with design and pre-planning, thus the perpetrators try to be at their best for not leaving behind traces of their misdeeds. Due to foregoing reasons, collection of sufficient incriminating material is always a hard nut to crack for the investigators. The case in hand is no exception and the petitioner, who later emerged to be the mastermind of scam, made an endeavour to erase all his footmarks from the scam.

6. It is noticed that Waqar Aslam (co-accused), in whose name the firms were registered and the bogus bills were prepared, was arrested in the case and later on got recorded statement under section 164, Cr.P.C., on 19.08.2020. The review of the statement of Waqar Aslam (co-accused) reveals that petitioner was not only the mastermind behind the fraud but also crafted the strategy to get it accomplished. According to the stance of Waqar Aslam (co-accused), as is evident from his section 164, Cr.P.C statement, Mohammad Sarfraz (petitioner) used to pocket major share from the plundered money. At the time of withdrawal of looted amount from the banks, the petitioner used to stay out by leaving such task to be performed by Waqar Aslam (co-accused). Another co-accused, namely, Muhammad Haider Altaf also got recorded his statement under section 164, Cr.P.C by pointing his fingers towards Mohammad Sarfraz (petitioner) as the main culprit. The probe of F.I.A further unveiled that during tenure of fraud, the petitioner amassed wealth, disproportionate to his known sources of income and include two apartments in top most housing schemes of Rawalpindi. Furthermore, the forensic of cell phone of the petitioner reveals that he was hand in glove with his co-accused in execution of scam.

7. This Court has also given a considered thought to the arguments of learned counsel whereby bail was sought on the principle of consistency by canvassing that case of petitioner is at par with Haider Altaf (co-accused). In this regard, it is observed that Haider Altaf (co-accused) was granted post arrest bail by this Court vide order dated 12.11.2020 passed in Crl.Misc.No.1975-B of 2020. Perusal of the order dated 12.11.2020 reveals that the case of Haider Altaf is on much lesser pedestal than the case of petitioner, thus concession of post arrest bail cannot be extended to him on the principle of consistency. It goes without saying that principle of consistency for grant of bail can be invoked only if the cases of accused persons are of alike nature.

8. The menace of corruption has deeply penetrated almost in all sphere of our life. Without distinction, the institutions and individuals are being financially defrauded and the criminals are making fortunes out of the plundered money. The fraudsters are playing havoc not only with the financial resources of general public but have also chewed the economy headlong with utmost rapacity. To counter such corrupt elements, the Courts are required to have resort to more dynamic approach while dealing with such cases even at bail stage. Instead of leaning in favour of such accused by resorting to leniency, the Courts have to help the cause of victims, if sufficient incriminating material is available on record. In somewhat similar circumstances, bail was refused to an accused in case reported as Sajjad Hussain v. The State (PLD 1997 Karachi 165) with following observation:- "The landmark judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court reported as Al-Jehad Trust through Raeesul Mujahideen Habib-ul-Wahab-ul Khairi and others v. Federation of Pakistan and others PLD 1996 SC 324 (Popularly known as the Judges' case) has raised hopes that the Courts will now play a significant role in eradicating corruption and other social evils. Therefore, it is humbly submitted that in such a situation a more pragmatic approach than has been the case so far on the parts of the Courts is needed at the investigation as well as bail stages of corruption cases, because if the Courts show almost motherly leniency towards people accused of high corruption then it would be impossible to successfully investigate and help bringing the culprits to book or to check the ever increasing cancer of corruption." The severity of white collar crimes can further be measured from the facts that such offences leave the victim in financial crises and mental distress. Due to foregoing reasons such offences are not to be placed at lower pedestals. It will not be an over-exaggeration to say that fraud is an offence only some paces behind robbery. In cases of robbery victims are deprived of their property through force and in cases of fraud similar goals are achieved but through deception.

9. To be precise the tentative perusal of record reveals that reasonable grounds to connect the petitioner with the commission of crime are available on record. Two co-accused through their statements recorded under section 164, Cr.P.C. have held the petitioner main person responsible for the crime. The Hon'ble Supreme Court of Pakistan in cases reported as State through Collector, Customs and Central Excise, Peshawar v. Sarfraz Khan (1997 SCMR 1293) and Ghulam Ahmed Chishti v. The State and another (2013 SCMR 385) refused the post arrest bail while placing reliance on the statements of co-accused even made before the police.

10. For what has been discussed above, this Court is not inclined to grant post-arrest bail to the petitioner and in consequence thereof the instant petition is dismissed. JK/M-57/L Petition dismissed.