Imran Ahmed Khan Niazi vs State S — 2025 PCrLJ 498 ISLAMABAD

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

Imran Ahmed Khan Niazi VS State S. 497---Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss. 409 & 109---Prevention of Corruption Act (II of 1947), S. 5---Criminal breach of trust by public servant, criminal misconduct---Bail, grant of---Further inquiry---Rule of consistency---Allegations against the petitioner was that he and his wife received a gift from Crown Prince of Saudi Arabia but failed to deposit the gift with the Toshakhana and purchased the same by undervaluing its price---Bail of co-accused-wife of petitioner had been accepted---Office Memorandum in question described that the non-deposit of a gift with the Toshakhana within a prescribed time limit was required to be met with "appropriate punitive action" under "the relevant rules."---Said Office Memorandum dated 18.03.2023 was to have effect from 22.02.2023---Prosecutor, submitted very fairly earlier that the Office Memorandum dated 18.03.2023 did not have retrospective effect so as to be made applicable to the case against the petitioner which took place almost two years before the said Office Memorandum was issued---Fact that the ealier Office Memorandum dated 18.12.2018 did not make the non-deposit of the gift with the Toshakhana/Cabinet Division liable to "appropriate action" under "the relevant rules," on tentative view, made the case against the petitioner as one of further inquiry---Petitioner's case was not on higher pedestal from that of his wife who had already been granted post-arrest bail by the High Court as the report under S.173, Cr.P.C placed both of them in the same category---Entrustment of the jewellery set (gift) was alleged against the petitioner as well as his wife---However, the receipt for the payment had admittedly been issued to the petitioner's wife and not to the petitioner---Petitioner was 72 years of age---In this case, he was arrested on 13.07.2024 and remained incarcerated in prison for more than four months---Investigation Officer had not felt the need to question the petitioner after the entrustment of the case to Federal Investigation Agency (FIA)---Since the reference against the petitioner had earlier been filed before Accountability Court, that would mean that the investigation in the case was complete---Charge against the petitioner had not been framed as yet, therefore, the conclusion of the trial was not in sight---Evidence in the case was largely documentary in nature which was already in the prosecution's possession---Hence, there was no chance of the petitioner tampering with such evidence---Present case was one of further inquiry---Post arrest bail was allowed, in circumstances.

Imran Ahmed Khan Niazi vs State S — 2025 PCrLJ 498 ISLAMABAD

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2025 PCRLJ