1. ' This Criminal Miscellaneous Application has been filed impugning orders passed by the learned Special Judge, Anti-Corruption (Provincial), Sukkur in Direct Complaint No,60 of 1995.
2. ' A direct complaint was filed by complainant Abdul Latif against Kareem Bux who was working as a Clerk in Darul Aman, Sukkur. The allegation in the complaint is that the daughter of complainant namely Mst. Marvi was abducted by accused Muhammad Yousif and others. It is alleged that she was kept at Darul Aman to destroy the evidence. It is further alleged that accused Kareem Bux met the complainant and demanded illegal gratification of Rs,50,000, which was ultimately settled for Rs,30,200 and the such amount has been paid by the complainant. In spite of receiving the amount, the abductee i,e, the daughter of complainant, was not released. She was released after the orders were passed by Special Magistrate, Sukkur. Such complaint was entertained and was sent for investigation to Circle Officer Anti-Corruption Establishment, Sukkur. After receiving the report, process was ordered to be issued against accused Kareem Bux.
3. ' The present applicant namely Mrs. Mukhtiar Yaseen who was working as Assistant Director Darul Aman, Sukkur, the learned trial Judge ordered as follows:- "From the evidence on record it is ostensible that merely a clerk cannot accept such a huge amount of illegal gratification without the connivance and abetment of his boss viz. Incharge, Darul Aman, Sukkur who is to be deemed as privy to the illegal transaction having in effective control as a result complainant was allowed to meet with his daughter Marvi without orders of competent authority and her clerk entered into deal of criminal misconduct. As an Enquiry Officer I feel it expedient in the interest of justice, let show-cause notice he issued to the Incharge, Darul Aman, Sukkur as to why she should also not be joined as co-accused in the complaint. She should also furnish relevant document with reply for examination and further proceedings.
4. ' Complainant is directed to file extra copy of complaint and other documents within (3) days for supplying to accused and attend Court on 31-10-1996."
5. ' After the show-cause notice was served upon the present applicant, she filed the reply vide Letter No,269, dated 23-11-1996. The learned trial Judge on 20-1-1997 passed the following order:-- "Complainant Abdul Latif is present with his counsel Mr. Gianchand. Accused Karim Bakhsh is present on bail with his counsel Mr. Sadique Ansari, Mrs. Mukhtiar Yasin, Assistant Director, Darul Aman. Sukkur is present in connection with show-cause notice, dated 17-11-1996, issued persuant to the order of Court, dated 23-10-1996 for impleading her as co-accused in the direct complaint.
6. Complaint was fixed yesterday, when Mr. Muhammad Sadique Ansari, Advocate undertook to file proper reply and produce Incharge Darul Aman, Sukkur. She had earlier submitted ambiguous reply to show-cause notice vide No,269 dated 23-11-1996. As such after hearing her and Mr. Muhammad Sadique Ansari, both stated that they shall file detailed reply today by 1-30 p.m.
7. Alongwith documentary proof in order to get herself absolved of the criminal liability and will also furnish the name of real defaulter/accomplice. It is 2-30 p.m. Now but neither Mrs. Mukhtiar Yasin, Assistant Director, Dam! Aman, Sukkur has turned up nor her counsel Mr. Muhammad Sadique Ansari and failed to file detailed reply to show-cause notice or even sent any formal intimation for time. It is inferred that Incharge Darul Aman, Sukkur has submitted misleading reply to the show- cause notice and has nothing to say else refuting show-cause notice, dated 17-11-1996 or to rebut the charges. Accordingly the reply furnished by her is hereby discarded and rejected. She appears to be an accomplice in the commission of offences as alleged against principal accused Karim Baldish, Clerk of Darul Aman, Sukkur. Under these circumstances, it is ordered that name of Mrs. Mukhtiar Yasin, Assistant Director, Darul Aman, Sukkur be added with red ink in the main complaint as co-accused in view of the order to this Court, dated 23-10-1996 and B.W. In the sum of Rs,50,000 be issued against her and sent to S.H.O., Police Station 'C' Section, Sukkur for service and return."
8. ' The learned trial Judge on 8-3-1997 passed the following orders:-- "Complainant is called absent. His Advocate Mr. Gianchand is present. Accused Karim Bux is present on bail. D.A. Is called absent. Accused Mrs. Mukhtiar Yasin in spite of service of B.W. Is repeatedly called absent, without intimation. It is informed that she is deliberately avoiding to attend Court. Let N.B.W. Be issued against her and send to S.H.O. Police Station 'C' Section, Sukkur with direction, in case of non-service process-server should attend this Court on the date of hearing."
9. ' Both these orders, dated 20-1-1997 and 8-3-1997 have been impugned in this criminal miscellaneous application and it is prayed that the proceedings against the present applicant may be quashed.
10. ' The main argument of Mr. Ghulam Sarwar Korai in this case is that the order has been passed just on the presumption alone which is neither borne from the complaint filed under section 200, Cr.P.C.
11. Nor from the enquiry report of the Circle Officer, Anti-Corruption Establishment. According to him there was no material existing before the learned Special Judge when he passed the orders for inference regarding the implication of present applicant. Contention urged is that inference which is not supported by any statement on the record and drawn by learned trial Judge is patently illegal and the issuance of such process on the basis of inference not supported by any material and impleading present applicant as co-accused is an abuse to the process of law and the Court.
12. According to him inference which may be drawn by the trial Court should have some basis in the records itself. Imagination of the trial Judge without any material could not be the basis of impleading the present applicant as co-accused.
13. ' Mr. Sardar Abdul Sattar Chohan learned counsel appearing for the State, supports quashment.
14. According to him the learned trial Judge has based his orders on the basis of imaginations and the inference so drawn have no basis in law.
15. ' I have given anxious consideration. The complainant has not stated that the present applicant in any event is connected with the offence. In paragraph 5 of the complaint, the complainant has stated as follows:-- "That the complainant, when came to know the above fact, has approached the incharge of Darul Aman, and before he could meet with the incharge of Darul Aman, the respondent/accused met the complainant and the complainant appraised him the above position and also shown his desire to meet his daughter."
16. ' The perusal of the complaint would reveal that the complainant did not meet the incharge of Darul Aman and before he could do so, he was approached by accused Kareem Bux. The imagination of the learned trial. Judge or the inference of learned trial Judge, which is the basis of two impugned orders runs contrary to the statement of complainant. In view of the complaint there are no basis for drawing inference that the applicant may be involved or may be hands"N"-gloves with accused Kareem Bux for demanding bribe. It is essential for every Court to pass appropriate orders based upon record. Imagination howsoever, fertile it may be could not be the basis for passing an order impleading person to face the rigours of the trial. For the purpose of inference it is essential that there should be prima facie allegation and some statement to connect the alleged accused with offence. If no such material is available just on the basis of imagination, inference cannot be drawn.
17. ' Consequently, this Criminal Miscellaneous Application is allowed, the proceedings against the present applicant namely Mst. Mukhtiar Yasin, Assistant Director, Darul Aman, Sukkur, and it is declared that the orders passed by the learned Special Judge, Anti-Corruption (Provincial), Sukkur, dated 20-1-1997 and 8-3-1997 are illegal and quashed.