SHAHZAD AHMED vs THE STATE through F — 2010 SCMR 1221 SUPREME-COURT

Fields are extracted from the reported citation and judgment text. Where a detail is not stated in the record, it is not shown.

SHAHZAD AHMED VS THE STATE through F.I.A. Islamabad 1994 SCMR 1283, 1995 SCMR 1249, PLD 2010 SC 265, Constitution of Pakistan 1973--185 , Criminal Procedure Code (Cr.P.C) 1898--497 , Electronic Transactions Ordinance 2002--37 ,Pakistan Penal Code 1860--109 , Pakistan Penal Code 1860--420 , Pakistan Penal Code 1860--468 , Prevention of Corruption Act 1947--5 , PREVENTION OF ELECTRONIC CRIMES ORDINANCE 2007--10 , PREVENTION OF ELECTRONIC CRIMES ORDINANCE 2007--18 , PREVENTION OF ELECTRONIC CRIMES ORDINANCE 2007--19 , PREVENTION OF ELECTRONIC CRIMES ORDINANCE 2007--3 , PREVENTION OF ELECTRONIC CRIMES ORDINANCE 2007--4 , PREVENTION OF ELECTRONIC CRIMES ORDINANCE 2007--5 , PREVENTION OF ELECTRONIC CRIMES ORDINANCE 2007--6 , PREVENTION OF ELECTRONIC CRIMES ORDINANCE 2007--7 , PREVENTION OF ELECTRONIC CRIMES ORDINANCE 2007--8 , PREVENTION OF ELECTRONIC CRIMES ORDINANCE 2007--9 , S. 497---Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss.420/468/109---preventionof Corruption Act, (II of 1947), S.5(2)---prevention of electronicCrimes Ordinance (LXXII of 2007), Ss. 3/4/5/6/7/8/9/10/18/19---electronic Transactions Ordinance (LI of 2002), S.37---Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art.185(3)---Cheating forgery, using as genuine a forged document abetment and criminal misconduct---Bail, refusal of----No work order had been issued to accused by any competent authority of the Department--- Accused had supplied tender items to the Ministry of Interior, prima facie fraudulently, having misappropriated a huge amount belonging to public exchequer--- Report submitted by the D.G., F.I.A., had clearly connected the accused with the commission of the offence, which was duly supported by the relevant documents and statements--- To grant or refuse bail was discretion of the courts---Both the courts below had refused to exercise discretion in favour of accused with cogent reasons without violating the settled principles laid down by Supreme Court---Accused seeking equity must come to constitutional court with clean hands---Conduct ofthe accused as depicted from the material on record was a hindrance in exercise of discretion by Supreme Court in his favour, who apparently was linked with the commission of the crime---Principle of consistency would not help the accused in such circumstances---Bail was declined to accused accordingly and leave to appeal was refused.

SHAHZAD AHMED vs THE STATE through F — 2010 SCMR 1221 SUPREME-COURT

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2010 SCMR