ABDUL WAHEED KHAN vs EHTESAB BUREAU through Deputy Prosecutor, Muzaffarabad S — 2021 YLR 1857 SUPREME-COURT-AZAD-KASHMIR

Case information

Citation: 2021 YLR 1857 SUPREME-COURT-AZAD-KASHMIR
Court: Supreme Court of Pakistan
Year: 2021
Reporter: YLR
Parties: ABDUL WAHEED KHAN vs EHTESAB BUREAU through Deputy Prosecutor, Muzaffarabad S
Subject matter: Criminal
Provisions referred to: S. 497---P; Penal Code (XLV of 1860); Corruption Act (II of 1947); Kashmir Ehtesab Bureau Act (I of 2001 )

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

Judgment text as reported

ABDUL WAHEED KHAN VS EHTESAB BUREAU through Deputy Prosecutor, Muzaffarabad S. 497---Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss. 467, 468, 470 & 109---Prevention of Corruption Act (II of 1947), Ss. 5(1)d & 5(2)---Azad Jammu and Kashmir Ehtesab Bureau Act (I of 2001 ), Ss.9, 10 & 11---Forgery, forgery for the purpose of cheating, forged document, abetment, criminal breach of trust by public servant, corruption and corrupt practice---Bail, refusal of---In the present case, the accused Bank-employees committed fraud with the Bank consumers and account holders, which fact had been disowned by the guarantors---Allegation of defence that not a single guarantor or witness had been examined by the prosecution or was mentioned in the interim reference, was negated by the prosecution and had referred number of account holders and their statements, who negated that they had not stood guarantor or given any guarantee for any loan against their accounts---Question of time barred investigation had neither been raised before the Trial Court nor before the High Court---Said question had been raised for the first time before Supreme Court, thus, the Supreme Court was unable to take up that matter for the first time---Even otherwise, the reference had been filed before the competent Court and the accused, herein, were at liberty to raise all those points before the competent forum---Accused being involved in the fraud and had shaken the confidence of the account holders and at that stage on the basis of collected material, prima-facie, it could not be said that they were not linked with the commission of offence with which they had been charged---Accused were not found entitled to the concession of bail, however after recording of some evidence they might file bail application on fresh grounds, if any---Appeal was dismissed, in circumstances.

Other judgments reported in 2021 YLR

2021 YLR 110 QUETTA-HIGH-COURT-BALOCHISTANDEPUTY COMMISSIONER (REVENUE)/COLLECTOR VS MEHRULLAH KHAN. Ss. 18 & 23 - Reference to court - Enhancement of compensation - Referee Judge en…
2021 YLR 90 QUETTA-HIGH-COURT-BALOCHISTANRAKHSHANDA JAMAL VS SHAHID-UL-HASSAN. Art. 199 - Constitutional petition - Maintainability - Pendency of criminal proceedings - Petitioner s…
2021 YLR 2068 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURTGHULAM MUHAMMAD VS REGIONAL COMMISSIONER FOR FEDERAL OMBUDSMAN, PESHAWAR ambiguity, avoiding of---Principle---Each and every part of statute…
2021 YLR 328 ISLAMABADMUHAMMAD NAWAZ VS State S. 497---Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss. 406, 468, 471 & 109---prevention of electronic Crimes Act (XL of 2016), Ss. 1…
2021 YLR 2033 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURTMUHEEB ULLAH VS State absconsion---Scope---Conviction of an accused could not be based on his abscondence when otherwise the prosecution fai…
2021 YLR 1560 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURTMEHBOOB-UR-REHMAN VS State S. 497---Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S. 149--- Bail--- Common object---Vicarious liability---Scope---Question of vi…

Back to the case-law library · Search Pakistani case law in Urdu or English