1. ' MRS. QAISER IQBAL, J.--- The applicants have resorted to invoke the criminal revision jurisdiction assailing the impugned order dated 9-10-2006, in Special Case No,67 of 1999 passed by Special Judge of Customs and Taxation, Karachi declining to provide all the relevant record/material in possession of the prosecution, in terms of Chapter XXII (a), section 265-C read with sections 94 and 548, Cr.P.C. And Articles 4 and 25 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan.
2. ' Precisely, the facts leading to the revision are that on 1-3-1999, a team of Collector of Sales Customs Department (West) Karachi, reached at the office of applicants Messrs Kashmir Plastizer, in connection with the investigation and seized the record under a Resumption memo. The details of the same hereinbelow:--
(i) Box Files 9 Boxes Files (nine).
(ii) Sales Register one.
(iii) Purchase Register one
(iv) One File Mian Nazir & Sons.
(v) One File Newage Plastic.
(vi) One File______ Sugar Mills.
(vii) One File Kashmir Sugar Mills (viii)One File Pak Saudi Ltd.
(ix) Two contact books S.Nos.201 to 250 and 151 upto.
(x) Sales Tax Invoice Books S.1 to 100 issued upto S.No,39, dated 4-2-1999.
(xi) Four Books Payment Voucher.
(xii) One Book Blank Bills, without serial number.
(xiii) 14 100 i,e, bills/blank vouchers.
(xiv) Statement of account (Bank Statement).
(xv) Loose documents twenty-three in numbers.
3. (Sd.) Sharafat Ali Nadeem), ' Superintendent Collection and Enquiries Sub-Division-I, Sales Tax, (West), Karachi.
4. ' After securing the documents of Sales Tax, Depar.Tnent remained quiet and after the delay of 9 weeks on 8-5-1999, one Feroz Alam Junejo, Assistant Collectorate Audit Division-I, Sales Tax Department Karachi, lodged the report that Messrs Kashmir Plasticizer, manufacturing Plastic Polyethylene bags/inner lines without having registration with the Sales Tax Department and without paying sales tax, levied team of the office of Collector of Sales Tax investigated. The matter, after inquiry it was revealed that the unit was engaged in manufacturing liner bags since 1995 without registration with the Sales Department as was spelled from the Partnership Deed, dated 1- 7-1996. Delivery Challan Books, whereby the applicants were liable to pay sales tax, they avoided to pay huge amount commencing from May, 1995 till March, 1999, total liabilities extended to Rs,5,205,254.
5. ' Mr. M.A. Kazi, learned counsel for the applicants had contended that after formal investigation challan was filed before the trial Court, a receipt under section 265-C, Cr.P.C. Was obtained as Exh.l from the applicants on 26-6-2001, later on 6-8-2001, an application was filed on behalf of the applicants before the trial Court to direct the prosecution to supply the documents referred by the prosecution witnesses in their statements. It was urged that the applicants shall be deprived of their proper defence and shall be seriously prejudiced, in case of non-supply of the record from 1- 3-2002 to 4-11-2002, the matter remained as it is, on 14-11-2002 learned trial Court passed an order and upon hearing the application issued notice for appearance of Investigating Officer, the order was repeated on several dates for production of the record and on 23-5-2003 Investigating Officer was directed to produce the record and hearing of application. To produce the record again on 17- 3-2004 and 7-5-2004, the same order was repeated, whereby a letter was directed to be written to the Collector Sales Tax for supply of inventory of record. On 9-10-2006, impugned order was passed, whereby the applicants request was not acceded however, prosecution was directed to continue sincere efforts to trace the record, if any, and furnish its report, and the matter was fixed for framing of the charge.
6. It is explicitly borne out from the order-sheet that the trial Court has neglected to implement its own order for the production of record and without any legal cause reviewed its order without any justification. It is apparent that procedural requirements of the criminal law are not mere formality, in all fairness, care must be taken to ensure the liberty of the subject for due dispensation of justice as laid down in case of Abdus Sattar Mola v. The Crown PLD 1953 FC page 145; Government of Sindh v. Fahad Naseem 2002 PCr.LJ page 17655 and Hakam Deen v. The State PLD 2006 SC (AJ&K) page 43, the relevant part of 265-C is reproduced hereinbelow for the sake of convenience:-- "265-C. Supply of statements and documents to the accused.---(1) In all cases instituted upon police report, copies of the following documents shall be supplied free of cost to the accused not later than seven days before the commencement of the trial, namely:--
(a) the first information report;
(b) the police report;
(c) the statements of all witnesses recorded under sections 161 and 164; and
(d) the inspection note recorded by an Investigating Officer on his first visit to the place of occurrence and the note recorded by him on recoveries made, if any: ' Provided that, if any part of a statement recorded under section 161 or section 164 is such that its disclosure to the accused would be inexpedient in the public interest, such part of the statement shall be excluded from the copy of the statements furnished to the accused.
(2) In all cases instituted upon a complaint writing:-- ' Learned counsel for the applicants has admitted that the copies of the documents seized under sections 40, 40-A, 40-A(2) of Sales Tax, 1990, have not been supplied to the applicant as is vouchsafe from the record.
7. ' According to Black's Law Dictionary word "document" has been defined as under:-- Document: An instrument on which is recorded, by means of letters or marks, the original, officials, or legal form of something, which may be evidentially used. In this sense the term 'document' applies to writings; towards printed, lithographed, or photographed; to map or plans; to seal, plates, or event stones on which inscriptions are cut or engraved; to photographs and pictures though maps or plans, the inscription, map, stones or gems as well as on paper or parchment.
8. It is simpliciter revealed from section 265-C of C.P.C., that an accused must be supplied the copies of all documents prior to commencement of the trial, and framing the charge. The proposition would not change even if the accused 'has himself conceded to, the omission to apply with the provision of section 265-C vitiates the whole trial. In present case, on number of occasion the Investigating Officer was directed to produce the record so much so that the letter was also issued to Collector Sales Tax for supply of inventory of the record, without having recourse to the record the applicant would not be in a position to set up his defence. No doubt, under Article 4 of Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan rights of individual be dealt in 'accordance with law.
9. ' In case of Government of Sindh v. Fahad Naseem referred (supra), dilating with the issue of applicability of the provision of section 267-C, Cr.P.C. It has been held that "to supply statements and documents to an accused to be free of cost before commencement of the trial because if a particular thing is required to be done in a particular manner then it should be done in that manner or it should not be done at all.
10. ' In view of the legal position emerged, Mr. Mehmood A. Rizvi, learned D.A.-G. Has fairly conceded that the requirement of section 265-C, Cr.P.C. Must be complied before setting the case at trial.
11. ' Having regard to the above facts and circumstances, I am of the view that the impugned order is not sustainable in law, as a result of above corollary same is hereby set aside, criminal revision is hereby allowed with the direction to the trial Court that compliance of section 265-C, Cr.P.C. Be made in its letter and spirit before framing the charge.
12. Orders accordingly.