' Through this application under section 497, Cr.P.0 the petitioner seeks bail a. a- arrest in case F.IiR.
No,78 registered on 1-10-2001 under sections 409/419/420/471/ 477-A/34, P.P.0 read with section 5(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947, at Police Station FIA (CBC), Lahore.
2. The brief facts mentioned in the F.I.R. Are that on the inquiry report of Mr. Muhammad Rafiq Shad, Special Officer of Income Tax Circle 4, Zone-C, Lahore, it was alleged that while reconciling the refunds issued by Circle-4, Zone-C, Lahore it was discovered that bogus refunds have- been issued and heavy amounts have been withdrawn by opening fictitious accounts in Commercial Banks. The inquiries revealed that Rana Muhammad Saleem ACCTT, presently posted in Special Zone, Lahore along with 9 others was directly involved and responsible for manipulation relating to the issuance of bogus refund vouchers and covering and ices in fictitious names, tampering of figures and issuance of refund without original certificates. It is further alleged in the F.I.R. That refund vouchers appearing in List No,1 attached with the complaint from Serial Nos.183 to 391 were signed by Muhammad Saleem Rana, ACCTT but were presented to the State Bank of Pakistan during the posting of Mr. S.M.Ali, ACCTT.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner was posted as Assistant Commissioner and had signed the vouchers which were produced before him and 'had performed his duty in accordance with law. It is further contended that the allegations levelled against the petitioner are false and the petitio- ner has been made scapegoat. It is also contended that the petitioner has denied the signatures on disputed vouchers whereupon his signatures were sent to handwriting expert for comparison, and for the time being, there is no evidence with the prosecution to connect the petitioner with the commission of the crime. It is further contended that the petitioner is seriously ill and a Board of Doctors was constituted to examine medically Rana Muhammad Saleem petitioner by Medical Superintendent of Services Hospital, Lahore consisting of the following doctors:-
(1) Professor Muhammad Saeed Khokhar, Professor of Medical Unit-I, Services Hospital Lahore.
(2) Professor Dr. Riaz A. Tasneem, Professor of Uroloy Services Hospital, Lahore.
(3) Dr. Hafiz Muhammad Aslam, Registrar, Department of Darmatology (Skin) Services Hospital, Lahore.
' According to him, the Board has given the opinion that the facilities for the treatment and necessary tests is not available in the jail hospital and even the facilities are not available in the Services Hospital. In such circumstances the petitioner according to the learned counsel for the petitioner has succeeded in making out a case for bail after arrest on the medical grounds as well.
He has relied upon (2000 SCM R 107); Mian Manzoor Ahmad Wattoo v. The State (PLD 1995 Supreme Court 58), Malik Muhammad Yousafullah Khan v. The State and another and (1998 SCM R 1065)
Zakhim Khan Masood v. The State.
4. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State has opposed this bail application of the petitioner on the ground that huge number of refund vouchers approximately amounting to Rs,1,88,61,388 are involved in this case and the petitioner was Assistant Commissioner who had signed the,-, vouchers and in such circumstances, the petitioner is not entitled to the relief as prayed for. As far as the medical ground is concerned, learned State Counsel, however, supports this contention.
5. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and also perused the record with great care and caution. The petitioner was serving as Assistant Commissioner Incom Tax, 'Central Circle Zone-C, Lahore and the functions which were to be performed by the petitioner were to sign vouchers for the refund of the income tax. The allegation against the petitioner is that number of refund vouchers have been prepared which are forged one and huge loss has been caused to the Government approximately amounting to Rs,I,88,61,388. The petitioner admittedly was serving as Assistant Commissioner during this period when the refund vouchers were signed. He is involved in a heinous criminal case and is not entitled to grant of bail on merits, as it is admitted fact that the petitioner remained posted during this period at the relevant post and signatures have not been denied by him. Learned counsel for the petitioner admits that the petitioner had almost signed vouchers amounting to Rs,6 crores but he denies the signatures on the bogus vouchers. The petitioner has been medically examined by the Board of Doctors constituted by Medical Superintendent, Services Hospital, Lahore, and the Board consisting of senior Doctors has given the following opinion, which is reproduced as under:---
(a) The Darmatologist mentioned in his report that said under-trial prisoner is suffering from progressive pigmontary Darmatosis. This is due to uncontrolled diabetus millitus. By controlling diabetes, the progress of the disease can be controlled.
(b) The Medical Specialist mentioned that central of blood sugar (B.S) and blood pressure (B.P) can only be obtained by admitting the patient to some medical ward.
(c) It is submitted that Medical Specialist advised specific investigations regarding his sugar and cardiac problem i,e,
(i) HBAIG.
(ii) 24 hours urinary protains.
(iii) E.T.T (Exercise Telerenco Cost)
(iv) Echocardiography.
' The Medical Superintendent has mentioned in his report that facilities of these. Investigations are not available at Services Hospital Lahore.
(d) The Urologist has advised modioinoa regarding his Renal (Kidney) ailments.
' In my opinion his multiple health Hazards, uncontrolled diabetus mallitus Blood Sugar, progressive Pigmentation Dermatitis, Unstable Angina Peeterio Mutral Valve prelopsing (Emhocardiography Old report fmding) and Diabetic Nouropathy, put him on high risk and proper management cannot be established in Jail Hospital, due to lack of facilities. Specialized investigations regarding his cardiac (Heart), Renal (Kidney) and Diabetus Mellituo (Sugar) are not available even in Services Hospital, Lahore.
6. Bare perusal of the above-said report shows that the petitioner is suffering from Multiple Health Hazards and cannot be treated in Jail Hospital, Constant watch is required coupled with taking of specific tests of different organs of the petitioner and such facilities are available even in the Services Hospital, Lahore. In such circumstances, I am fortified by the view taken by the august Supreme Court of Pakistan in (2000 SCM R 107), titled as Mian Manzoor Ahmad Wattoo v. The State The relevant portion is reproduced as under for ready reference:-- "As discussed earlier, the object of criminal prosecution is not to punish an under-trial prisoner for the offence alleged against him. The object of criminal trial is that the accused is made to face the trial and answer the criminal charge against him. Since we have reached the conclusion after considering the medical report received from A.F.I.C. On the condition of the appellant that his continued detention in the jail is hazardous to his life and that the specialized treatment needed by him, cannot be provided within the jail premises, we are inclined to admit the appellant to bail in all the three cases."
' Similar view has been taken in Malik Muhammad Yousafullah Khan's case reported in (PLD. 1995 Supreme Court 58), which is reproduced as under:--- "From the above discussed position it is clear to us that the bail on medical ground can be granted under section 497, Cr.P.C. If the Court reaches the conclusion on the basis of medical report that the ailment with which the accused is suffering is such that it cannot be properly treated while in custody in Jail. The fact that the appellant is not suffering from any particular type of injury (as observed by the learned Judge that there was no fracture of bone in that case), would not be a ground either to refuse or grant the bail on medical ground. The correct criteria for grant of bail to an accused in a non-bailable case, on medical ground in our view, would be that the sickness or ailment with which the accused is suffering is such that it cannot be properly treated within the premises of jail and that some specialised treatment is needed and his continued detention in jail is likely to affect his capacity or is hazardous to his life."
' The august Supreme Court of Pakistan has also taken the similar view in (1998 SCM R 1065) titled as Zakhim Khan Masood v The State, the relevant portion is reproduced as under:-- "It has been observed by the doctor in the above report that the ailment with which the petitioner is suffering, is likely . To have hazardous effects on his life because stress and strain may aggravate his disease. The petitioner is, undoubtedly, sick and as such, needs ' treatment in conducive conditions free from any kind of pressure. In custody, it cannot be said that the petitioner shall have full peace of mind. His recovery from ailment shall, surely, be slow if he remains in detention. We are, therefore, satisfied to observe that the petitioner's life may seriously be to danger if he is not released on bail. In this view of the matter, the petitioner is admitted to bail in the sum of Rs,5,00,00,000 (Rupees five crores) with two sureties of 2 and a half crores each to the satisfaction of the trial Court."
7. From the bare perusal of above said case-law and the medical report, I am of the view that remaining of the petitioner in jail will be dangerous to his life and it is in the interest of justice, if the petitioner is admitted to bail on medical grounds as he cannot be treated in jail for the diseases with which he is suffering from. Hence, I admit the petitioner to bail in the sum of Rs,50,00,000 (Rupees fifty lacs only) with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of Special Judge,(Central), Lahore.