' This judgment is intended to dispose of the following writ petitions both have been filed for the abashment of F.I.R. No,41 registered on 26-11-1986 at Anti-Corruption Establishment, Multan under sections 409, 420, 468 and 471, Pakistan Penal Code and under section 5 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947:
(i) Writ Petition No,1374 of 1995 titled as:
(1) Muhammad Zaman Khan;
(2) Muhammad Saleem Khan; and
(3) Muhammad Tariq versus
(1) Special Judge (Anti-Corruption), Multan.
(2) The State
(ii) Writ Petition No,11712 of 1998titled as:
(1) Habib Ullah 'versus
(1) The State and 4 others
2. Muhammad Zaman Khan, Muhammad Saleem Khan and Muhammad Tariq (petitioners of Writ Petition No,1374/95) and Habib Ullah (petitioner of Writ Petition No,11712 of 1998) have been booked along with Hameed Ullah Khan Malik, Sikandar Ali and Khadim Hussain by the Anti-Corruption Establishment, Multan vide F.I.R. No,4, dated 26-11-1986 under sections 409, 420, 468 and 471 of Pakistan Penal Code and under section 5 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947.
3. According to the prosecution case the auction for leasing out the collection of Export Tax as per the approved Schedule for the year 1986-87 was held on 7-9-1986. Hamid Khan, Chief Officer, Habib Ullah Khan, Taxation Officer, Sikandar Ali, Senior Clerk and Khadim Hussain, Tax Clerk, Zila Council, Khanewal by abusing their official position being public servants in collusion with Muhammad Zaman Khan Contractor, Muhammad Saleem Khan Contractor and Muhammad Tariq, an employee of the aforesaid contractors, included certain items of the tax such as cotton and vegetable not liable to levy of tax and also got printed the rates in respect of some of the items on the receipts supplied to the contractors, in the shape of books, against the rates approved by the Zila Council, Khanewal. They are also alleged to have removed the sanctioned Schedule from the official file and placed therein forged copies of the Schedule showing the new items and exorbitant rates of the export tax with ulterior motive. After the investigation the challan was submitted on 4-2-1988 before the learned Special Judge, Anti-Corruption, Multan. The accused persons were summoned to face the trial vide order, dated 2-3-1988 who were charged on 28-6- 1989 to face the trial under sections 409, 420, 467, 468, 471/109, Pakistan Penal Code and under section 5 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947. They did not plead guilty thereto and claimed to be tried.
4. However, no evidence has been recorded even though many adjournments have been granted.
5. Habib Ullah Khan accused filed Writ Petition No,2610-S of 1993 to get an order passed by this Court for the final decision of the case as he stood retired on 1-6-1990 and was not being allowed to enjoy the fruits of pension benefit. On 4-12-1993 this Court passed an order directing the learned Special Judge, Anti-Corruption, Multan to conclude the trial within three months. The present position is the same i,e,, neither the evidence has been recorded nor the trial stands concluded.
6. The aforesaid accused have filed the aforesaid writ petitions for the abashment of the F.I.R. On the grounds that the total amount of lease money was collected from the contractors which was deposited in the account of the District Council, Khanewal, that no case is made out against the petitioners-accused, that the trial is not being concluded which is pending for the last about more than 12 years and that further processing of the same is nothing but an abuse of process of law.
The comments have been received from the Special Judge, Anti-Corruption, Multan.
7. I have heard the learned counsel for the writ petitioners of both the writ petitions as well as the learned Assistant Advocate-General.
8. The main contentions of the learned counsel for the petitioners are that no loss was caused by the petitioners to the District Council, Khanewal as the lease money was deposited and that no evidence has been brought on the record to justify the allegations against the petitioners even though the challan was submitted on 4-2-1988 and the petitioners were charged on 28-6-1986.
They added that the learned trial Court has not complied the order of this Court passed in Writ Petition No,2610-S of 1993 whereby it was directed to conclude the trial within a period of three months w,e,f, 4-12-1993. They maintained that the petitioners are facing the ordeal without any legal and factual justification and that the further processing of the matter is nothing but an abuse of process of law. On the contrary learned Assistant Advocate-General expressed that the conclusion of the trial has not been effected by the trial Court even though the challan was submitted more than a decade before and suggested that a direction for the decision may be passed. He added that it is not a case for the abashment of the F.I.R.
9. However, I hold the view that the long pendency of the challan in the light of the aforesaid facts and circumstances is nothing but an abuse of process of law. The case was registered on 26-11- 1986. The challan was submitted on 4-2-1988. The accused were charged on 28-6-1989. No evidence has been recorded. In Writ Petition No,2610-S of 1993 an order was passed on 4-12-1993 by this Court whereby the learned Special Judge, Anti-Corruption, Multan, was directed to finally decide the case within a period of three months which expired on 3-3-1994. Today is 8-3-2000.
Surprisingly no efforts have been made by the learned Special Judge, Anti-Corruption, Multan, to conclude the trial. Habib Ullah petitioner-accused stands retired w,e,f, 1-6-1990 and has not been allowed to enjoy the fruits of pension benefit. In the circumstances it is a case of hardship for all the accused persons and the prosecution cannot be allowed to abuse the process of law. Even otherwise the lease money was paid by the contractors to the District Council, Khanewal. No documentary evidence has been attached with the challan to justify the charges against the accused persons. The criminal proceedings have been initiated at the instance of Baz Khan who was as unsuccessful bidder in the auction. In the circumstances of the matter the sword of criminal litigation cannot be allowed to remain on the heads of the accused persons and I hold that the writ petitions have the merit whereby the F.I.R has been desired and required to be quashed. In short the F.I.R. Is liable to be quashed as it tantamount to be abuse of powers vested in State functionaries.
10. For what has been said above, I accept both the aforesaid writ petitions and quash F.I.R. No,41 registered on 26-11-1986 at Police Station Anti-Corruption Establishment, Multan and the proceedings arising out of the same. In the circumstances of the matter, there shall be no order as to costs.