' Through this writ petition Ghulam Qasim Khakwani and certain other Councillors of Municipal Corporation, Multan, seek the direction of this Court to the Additional Director, Anti-Corruption, Multan (respondent No,1), for the registration of a case against respondents Nos.2 to 16 for the embezzlement of Government money and their prosecution in the Court of competent jurisdiction after the completion of investigation.
2. The allegations in the writ petition are that Government of the Punjab had sanctioned a sum of Rs,25,00,000 under `Tameer-e-Watan' Programme and this amount was to be utilised by the M.NA./M.PA. Under the instrucuxtions of the Local Government. However, Malik Salahuddin Dogar, M.PA. Of Multan and an Ex-Mayor of Municipal Corporation, Multan in collusion with his brother Shaukat All Dogar, presently the Mayor of Municipal Corporation, Multan (respondent No,2), instead of depositing this amount in the account of Local Government, deposited the same in P.L. Account of the Corporation after its receipt on 17-3-1992. Later they jointly embezzled this amount in collusion with other respondents, including Noor Ahmad, Contractor (respondent No,15) and Allah Bakhsh, contractor (respondent No,16) by disbursing to the former a sum of Rs,8,90,000 by means of two cheques, each dated 18-3-1992, and to the latter through six different cheques issued on the same day with the aggregate amount of Rs,15,58,750 despite the fact that they had executed no work or development scheme nor any scheme was chalked out.
3. On 30-5-1992, when this writ petition was fixed, a copy thereof was directed to be sent to the Additional Director, Anti-Corruption (respondent No,1) for his parawise comments and he complied with the order. On 27-10-1992 the petitioners filed C.M. No,1012 of 1992 wherein it was, inter alia, complained that respondent No,1 was holding enquiry on the complaint of the petitioner, as it appeared from his parawise comments, but respondent No,2 presently the Mayor of the Corporation, with the support of his M.P.A. Brother, was refusing to hand over the relevant record to him and there was apprehension that they might tamper with or destroy the record in order to cover up the embezzlement of huge public funds.
4. Due to the urgency of the matter, notice of the application was directed to be issued to respondents Nos.1 and 2 for today and both of them were directed to appear with record. The learned Assistant Advocate-General was also directed to ensure the service of notice. Li response to the notice, respondent No,1 has put in appearance but neither respondent No,2, nor anyone else on his behalf, has turned up, nor he has caused the production of record if he himself has not been able to appear for any good reason.
5. Mr. Shafiq Hussain Bokhari, Additional Director, Anti-Corruption, Multan (respondent No,1) states that Ghulam Hussain Khan Khizar petitioner had addressed the application, dated 23-4-1992, to the Chief Minister of the Punjab and had sent a copy thereof to him (respondent No,1) on 24-4-1992 and he, after recording his statement on 15-6-1992, had ordered the enquiry into the allegations of embezzlement of public funds made against the M.P.A., the Mayor and others. He further states that for the purpose of conducting enquiry he had constituted an Enquiry Team consisting of Zafar Iqbal, Assistant Director, Anti-Corruption and Circle Officer, Multan, with whom Sub-Engineer of the Department was also subsequently associated. According to him, the Enquiry Committee has not been able to make any headway because the Chief Officer of the Municipal Corporation, Multan (respondent No,4) has sent a note, dated 30-64992, initiated by the Office Superintendent and approved by the' Mayor, indicating their refusal to hand over the relevant record to the Enquiry Committee for inspection. With reference to the contents of the note, copy of which he has placed on the record of this Court, he submits that as per stand taken by the Corporation, the amount of Rupees 25 sacs was neither the Municipal Funds, nor Government Grant, rather, this amount was provided to Malik Salah-ud-Din Dogar, M.PA. For the development schemes of his Constituency No,PP-160, Multan and the work was executed under his direction. He further explained that it was also stated in the note that so far as the record of this amount was concerned, the said M.P.A.
Should be contacted as the staff had his instruction not to provide the relevant record to any agency without his permission.
6. Elaborating certain allegations in the writ petition, the learned counsel for the petitioners submits that respondent No,2 and his brother Mr. Salah-udDin Dogar, M.PA. Had received the aforesaid amount from the Government on 17-34992 and they disbursed the same on the following day to the two contractors in the abovementioned manner, and obviously they could not spend this amount on any development scheme within two days. He contends that since no development scheme had been prepared, the question of its execution did not arise and for that reason no tender was invited by respondent No,2 nor the prescribed procedure for spending Government money was ever followed. According to the learned counsel, his client went on bringing to the notice of higher authorities, including the President, Prime Minister and the Chief Minister, the malpractices of respondent No,2 and his associates but no one took serious notice of it and even respondent No,1, to whom a written request was made for the registration of the case against respondents Nos.2 to 16, put him off and seeing no alternative, he has invoked the Constitutional jurisdiction of this Court in public interest.
7. Though for the registration of a criminal case it is not necessary to afford the accused a prior opportunity of being heard, yet, in view of the representative character of respondent No,2 it was considered proper to afford him an opportunity of explaining his position, but neither he has come forward nor he has sent anyone on his behalf. He has not arranged even the production of the relevant record, which he could conveniently do through the Standing Counsel of the Corporation or the Chief Officer or through some other functionary of the Corporation if he, for any compelling reason, was unable to appear. Mirza Aziz Baig, Advocate who is Standing Counsel of the Municipal Corporation, has put in appearance but only to inform this Court in a casual manner that respondent No,1 has left for Lahore. He says that he has no other instructions. Being a counsel for the Corporation, intimately connected with its affairs, he has been asked to cause the production of the relevant record in the Court through the Chief Officer or through some official of the Corporation to enable the Anti-Corruption Department to inspect it but he has failed to do so. This is not expected of an advocate, who owes duty towards this Court as well. In these circumstances, the complaint of Additional Director Anti-Corruption, Multan (respondent No,1) does not appear to be incorrect that Malik Salah-ud-Din Dogar, M.PA./formerly Mayor of Multan Corporation and his brother Malik Shaukat Ali Dogar, who is presently Mayor of Multan Corporation (respondent No,2), are purposely withholding the record regarding the expenditure of the aforesaid amount, obviously to avoid a probe into the allegations of embezzlement or misappropriation against them and other functionaries of the Corporation, including certain contractors. The funds made available to them by the Provincial Government are public money which they, their associates and subordinates, are bound to account for but they are avoiding to do so and even the senior Government functionaries are expressing their helplessness to raise a little finger against them.
8. In the prevailing conditions in the country when there is hue and cry in the rank and file against jobbery, corruption and similar other crimes in every walk of life, especially in official circles, and neither the senior Government functionaries nor the high-ups in the Government are taking any serious notice of such malpractices, and persons like respondent No,2 and his M.P.A. Brother, wielding political power in the peculiar administrative and political set up, are openly defying to subject themselves to the process of accountability, by refusing even to hand over the record to the Anti-Corruption Department and have virtually paralysed the enquiry being conducted against them in a lukewarm manner on the complaint of the petitioners, this Court has to intervene in the discharge of its Constitutional obligations in public interest. Therefore, this Court directs the Additional Director, Anti-Corruption, Multan (respondent No,1) to register a case against respondents Nos.2 to 16 under section 409, P.P.C. Read with section 5 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947, and after sending a copy thereof to the Deputy Registrar of Multan Bench, take up its investigation personally. He is also directed to send a weekly progress report about the investigation of the case through the Deputy Registrar to this Bench so long as it is on circuit here and thereafter to the Honourable Senior Judge, Incharge of Multan Bench.
9. Before parting with this order, I would like to observe that despite the fact that the Additional Director, Anti-Corruption, Multan (respondent No,1), the senior most officer of the Anti-Corruption Department in this region, has been directed to take up investigation of the case himself, I do not carry high hopes about his effective handling of the investigation and its ultimate outcome, especially in view of the status of the accused and the intransigence that they have already displayed in not allowing him access to the relevant record. If Dogar Brothers can flagrantly refuse to hand over the record to him, how they can allow him to conduct investigation against them and their associates especially when they allegedly have the support of the highups in the Government? This is not the problem oniy in this case, rather, this difficult situation has been arising and shall continue to arise whenever influential C persons, having political backing and bureaucratic support, are to be proceeded against for their malpractices. Therefore, either the officers of the status of respondent No,1 and of lower ranks charged with the duty of holding enquiries and conducting investigations against influential persons should be given adequate support and due protection, or some more powerful and independent organisation like Election Commission, both at the Federal and Provincial level, should be set up to tackle with this problem effectively. As a necessary corollary thereto, the status of the Judicial Officers, who are ultimately to try the influential persons charged with .The allegations of corruption, shall also have to be raised.
Since corruption and jobbery in the services and political circles is the root cause of all ills in the society, it is high time for those charged with the duty of running the affairs of the State at the higher level, to devise ways and means to effectively tackle this knotty problem.
10. With the above directions/observations the writ petition is disposed of.