RAHMAT HUSSAIN JAFFERI, J.---This is a bail application filed by the above named applicant in a Case No,92 of 2002 under sections 409/468/471/477-A/34, P.P.C. Read with section 5(2) Act II, PCA, 1947, pending before the Court of Special Judge (Offences in Banks) Karachi.
2. The facts giving rise to the present application are that on 18-7-2002 at about 4-00 p.m.
Complainant Shahzad Ahmad lodged a report at Police Station F.I.A. CBC-II, Karachi, alleging therein that on 26-6-2002 a cheque pertaining to PLS Account titled Anwar Hussain amounting to Rs,2,297,221 was found with the cash in the strong room at the time of checking and close of business. The complainant checked the account of said Anwar Hussain but the ledger was showing a credit balance of Rs,753 on 26-6-2002. It is alleged that co-accused Bashir Ahmed was involved in parallel banking by pocketing heavy amounts deposited by certain selective clients.
The F.I.R. Further reveals that in addition to what has been stated about the above noted cheque the complainant discovered that the accused had also misappropriated an amount of Rs,353,922 while depositing the receipt of utility bills collected on 26-6-2002 and in order to cover the short fall the accused was borrowing cash from the main cashier. The police started the investigation, arrested the accused and recorded the statements of the witnesses. After completing the investigation challan was submitted in the Court. A bail application was filed before the trial Court but it was dismissed on 15-8-2002.
3. The learned advocate for the applicant has argued that no money was entrusted with the applicant by the customers or depositors at the counter as he was simply an incharge in the cash department and that he had signed the cheque in question as one of the authorised signatory. He has attacked the statements of P.Ws. In depth, and argued that the evidence is unreliable and untrustworthy, therefore, the case requires further enquiry. He has further argued that the applicant has been involved due to departmental rivalry: that the offence is not punishable with death or life imprisonment, therefore, he has requested for the grant of bail.
4. On the other hand, learned D.A.-G. Mr.Khursheed A. Hashmi, has stated that the name of the applicant is mentioned in the F.I.R.: that he has been involved by the prosecution witnesses, namely complainant Shahzad Ahmad, P.W. Muhammad Sajid Sheikh, P.W. Anwar Hussain, Prem Chand and Zafar Saleem: that on the relevant date the applicant was incharge of the department, therefore, he had received the payments. He has further argued that deeper appreciation of evidence is not permissible at the bail stage and from the evidence on the record prima facie case has been made out against the applicant, therefore, he is not entitled for the concession of bail.
5. We have given our due consideration to the arguments and have gone through the police papers. It is well-settled principle of law that at the bail stage deeper appreciation of evidence is not permissible but a tentative assessment of the evidence can be made in order to see whether prima facie case has been made out against the accused or not.
6. From the perusal of F.I.R. It is clear that the name of applicant is mentioned in it. The complainant in his additional statement has given further details with regard to the involvement of the applicant and stated that the applicant had admitted his guilt before him and several other witnesses, as such there is extra judicial confession in the case. The statement of P.W. Muhammad Sajid Sheikh is to the effect that the accused was incharge of cash department and used to take cash from co- accused Bashir Ahmad and return the same in the evening times. The statement of P.W. Prem Chand is to the effect that extra judicial confession was made by the applicant before him and other witnesses. The statement of Zafar Saleem, employee of the Bank, is to the effect that applicant used to take cash from the co-accused Bashir Ahmed and used to return the same and in lieu thereof he used to hand-over cheque, P.W. Anwar Hussain is the account holder of the cheque which was found in the cash department. His statement is to the effect that for the purpose of visa he required bank statement, therefore, he had contacted the applicant for the said purpose and at the instance of the applicant he has opened the account by depositing an initial amount of Rs,1,000 but the applicant had obtained two blank cheque books duly signed by him for making transactions in the account because he was a poor person and could not afford to deposit huge amounts in the Bank.
7. From the tentative assessm ent of the above evidence, it is clear that there is prima facie case against the applicant. It is pointed out that there is legal contract between the Bank and its employees to discharge the trust honestly and fairly etc. And within Law. If the employees of the Banks are allowed to violate the said trust then entire Banking system would collapse. It appears that the general law was not found adequate to deal with the offences of banking, therefore, special law in the shape of offences in Respect of Banks (Special Courts) Ordinance, 1984, has been enacted to deal with such offences, as such stringent steps are required to be taken.
8. In view of the hove position the applicant is not entitled for the concession of bail.
9. By our short order dated 24-9-2002, we had dismissed Criminal Bail Application No,1190 of 2002 and above are the reasons for the same.