IN THE HONOURABLE SUPREME COURT OF PAKISTAN

(Appellate Jurisdiction)

Crl. PLA No. of 2022

Muhammad Azeem son of

Muhammad Shareef
Muslim, adult, presently confined
in Central Prison,
Sukkur
…. Petitioner

VERSUS

National Accountability Bureau

Airport Road, Sukkur through
its Dy Asstt. Director/Investigation Officer ...Respondent

CRIMINAL PETITION FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL UNDER

ARTICLE 185 (3) OF THE CONSTITUTION OF THE ISLAMIC
REPUBLIC OF PAKISTAN, 1973

Respectfully Sheweth:

1. This petition arises out of declining the post arrest bail of

the petitioner by Division Bench of Hon`ble High Court of Sindh
at Sukkur Bench vide order 09.3.2022 passed in Crl. Bail
Application No.257 of 2021.

QUESTIONS OF LAW

a. Whether the order passed by the Hon`ble High

Court is sustainable under the law?

b. Whether the order passed by the Hon`ble High

Court is the result of misreading and non-reading of
the materials available on record?

c. Whether the petitioner`s case does not come under

the ambit of rule of consistency as all the other
accused persons in the same case have already
been granted bail?

Page 1 of 12
 d. Whether declining the bail on mere allegations of
embezzlement of huge amount without any proof is
lawful?

e. Whether non conclusion of the trial within stipulated

period and undue confinement of the petitioner for
last 20 months does not constitute the case of
hardship?

f. Whether not giving benefit of the flaws in

prosecution case to the petitioner at bail stage is
unjust and unlawful?

g. Whether declining the bail to the petitioner relying

upon the dossier/record which was neither part and
parcel of the NAB reference nor of the investigation
report is lawful?

h. Whether prior to awarding the contract to the

petitioner for shifting the wheat stocks from
Nausheroferoz to Karachi which had already been
embezzled by the food department does not make
the case for further inquiry?

i. Whether admittedly when it has come on surface

that even after one year of awarding the contract the
position of wheat stocks remained the same as
before awarding the contract to the petitioner does
not make the case for further inquiry?

j. Whether declining of bail on the allegation of

embezzlement in petitioner`s PRC/Mahmoodia Flour
Mills without any evidence is lawful?

k. Whether the Hon`ble High Court while declining the

bail to the petitioner has followed the principles law
laid down by this Hon`ble Court for grant of bails?

l. Whether in the presence of serious flaws in the

prosecution case, the petitioner is not entitled for
concession of bail ?

m. Whether withholding of bail unnecessarily is

tantamount to punishment?

FACTS AS PER REFERENCE.

Page 2 of 12
 1. That during an ongoing investigation against Altaf
Hussian Keerio, Food Inspector, District Naushehroferoze,
a complaint in Khuli Katcheri of NAB Sukkur complained
that the Officials/Officers of Food Department Govt. of
Sindh, District Naushehroferoze have misappropriated
Govt. wheat from godowns and flour mills. DG NAB
Sukkur authorized direct investigation vide letter
No.740088/IW-II/CO-A/NAB Sukkur/2019/1752, dated 27 th
May, 2019. It is further submitted that the Investigation
Report prepared by the I.O. may be read and treated as
an integral part of the reference.

2. That the investigation report reveals that

officers/officials of Food Department in connivance with
each other are involved in misappropriation of wheat stock
of the crop year 2016-17 & 2017-18 of District
Naushehroferoze as well as private person whose flour
mill was declared as PRC and the private person and
lessee who lifted the wheat stock under an agreement
with Food Department have also misappropriated the
Government what stock which caused loss to the
exchequer to the tune of Rs.1,40,72,96,307/-

3. That in view of the allegations pertaining to huge

shortage in wheat stock, multiple physical verification of
Gov. wheat stock at different PRC`s and WPC`s of Food
Department District Naushehroferoze were carried out in
presence of officers/officials of Food Department and
Judicial Magistrates, Naushehroferoze.

4. That the investigation report reveals that according

to the daily record [DR-1] of Food Department, the
following stock is available in PRCs/WPCs of District
Naushehroferoze of the crop years 2016-17 and 2017-18.

DR-1 Stock Available

Total Jute Total
Centre PP Jute PP KGS Jute KGS weight PP Jute PP Kgs Kgs weight
50,3 2,524,1 70,4 2,594,5
Darbelo 90 704 06 00 06 - - - - -
101,5 5,139,6 5,139,6
Kandiaro 44 - 12 - 12 - - - - -
18,3 1,007,7 1,007,7
Mehrabpur 76 - 00 - 00 2 - 100 - 100
72,0 3, 3,709,4 329,6 4,039,0 139, 1
Noorpur 06 296 12 00 12 2,791 - 550 - 39,550
85,4 45, 4,284,6 4,527,6 8,812,2 31
Moro 99 151 72 03 75 620 4 ,000 400 31,400
38,4 1,920,3 1,920,3
Paddidan 08 - 29   29 - - - - -
366,2 49, 18,585,8 4,927,6 23,513,4 170, 1
Total 23 151 31 03 34 3,413 4 650 400 71,050

5. That the investigation report revealed that on

inspection it is unearth that accused No.1 to
Page 3 of 12
 7/officers/officials of Food Department (& Deputy Director
Ali Asghar Naich died during investigation) in connivance
with each other and accused No.11/private person /
contractor / lessee had misappropriated government
wheat stock as following:
Centre PP Bags Jute PP KGS Jute KGs Total Weight PP Rate / 100Kg Jute Total Loss
Bags Rs.4120.59 Rate/100Kg
Rs.4204.19
Darbelo 50,390 704 2,524,106 70,400 2,594,506 104,008,059 2,959,750 106,967,809

Kandiaro 101,544 - 5,139,612 - 5,139,612 211,782,338 - 211,782,338

Mehrabpur 18,374 - 1,007,600 - 1,007,600 41,519,065 - 41,519,065

Noorpur 69,215 3,296 3,569,862 329,600 3,899,462 147,099,377 13,857,010 160,956,387

Moro 84,879 45,147 4,253,672 4,527,203 8,780,875 175,276,383 190,332,216 365,608,599

Paddidan 38,408 - 1,920,329 1,920,329 79,128,885 - 79,128,885

Total 362,810 49,147 18,415,181 4,927,203 23,342,384 758,814,107 207,148,976 965,963,083

6. That investigation report reveals that the accused

Nos.8.9 &10 in connivance with each other lifted
government stocks from PRCs no report and
Naushehroferoze in order to store in declared mill PRC
M/s Gul Flour Mill Shahdadpur wherein on inspection
neither the stock reached in Mill PRC nor stored, instead
unlawfully, illegally, intentionally, misappropriated by
accused No.s.8.9.&10 which caused loss to the
exchequer to the tune of Rs.10.02.62,715/-

7. That the investigation report reveals that accused

No.11 being contractor as well as lessee of Mehmoodia
Flour Mill in connivance with officers/officials of Food
Department, Govt of Sindh is involved in misappropriation
of govt wheat stock and caused loss to the exchequer to
the tune of Rs.1,30,70,33,592/-.

8. That the investigation report reveals that accused Ali

Asghar Naich Deputy Director Food Department, Shaheed
Benazirabad died during investigation. Therefore, he is
not arrayed as accused in this reference

9. That according to evidence collected during the

investigation, it has been established that accused person
1 to 7 in connivance and collusion with each other (Ali
Asghar Naich Deputy Director Food, died during
investigation) and accused No.8 to 11 are involved in
misuse of authority and misappropriation of govt wheat
stock by converting govt wheat stock into their own usage
which were lawfully entrusted to them which caused loss
to the exchequer to the tune of Rs.1,40,72,96,307/-. The
accused No.1 to 11 jointly and severally are involved in
misuse of authority which resulted in misappropriation in
connivance and collaboration with each other. Thus
accused persons committed the offence of corruption and
Page 4 of 12
corrupt practices as defined in section 9 (A) (iv)(vi) & (xii)
punishable under Section 10 of the NAB Ordinance, 1999
and schedule thereto.

10. That on appraisal of the material and evidence

collected during the investigation placed before me I am of
the opinion that it would be proper and just to proceed
further against the above referred accused persons as
there is sufficient incriminating materials available on
record to justify the filing of this reference against the
accused persons. Thus the matter is being referred to this
Hon`ble Court within the meaning of section 18(g) read
with section 24(b) of NAO, 1999. The investigation report,
list of witnesses and documentary evidence as per list are
attached herewith.

ROLE ASSIGNED TO THE ACCUSED PER

INVESTIGATION REPORT

He signed an agreement with Food Department for

safe shifting of Government wheat stock from District
Naushehroferoze to Karachi Food Go-downs District
Malir. During investigation it is established that wheat
stock lifted by him from various PRCs / WPCs of District
Naushehroferoze is 18,219 Jute Bags [1,727,306 kgs].
273,385 PP Bags [12,729,902 kgs]. However, as per
record collected from DFC Malir, total wheat stock
transported by M/s Azeem & Co. to Malir Godowns
Karachi is 5160 Jute Bags (466, 080 kg) 133,217 PP Bags
(6,080,111Kg). Therefore, it is established that
Muhammad Azeem has embezzled 13.059 Jute Bags
(1,261,226 Kg) 140,168 PP Bags (6,649,791 Kg) of
government wheat and caused loss to the national
exchequer to the tune of Rs.327,510,569/-.

Muhammad Azeem in connivance with Ghulam

Farooque Kaleri the than DFC Naushehroferoze and Food
inspectors have managed fake bilties and GP-13 of
February 2020, against the Government wheat stock
found short in WPCs/PRCs in May 2019.

He being the lessee of Mehmoodia Flour Mill has

also embezzled the wheat stock stored at his mill PRC. As
per record submitted by DFC office Naushehroferoze 750
Jute Bags (75000 KGs) and 2525.56 PP Bags (252556
KGs) were found short in the stock. The cost of that wheat
stock is Rs.13,559,940. Therefore, the total loss caused
by the accused Mohammad Azeem is Rs.1,30,70,33,
592/-.

Page 5 of 12
11. That the respondent issued petitioner`s arrest warrants on
8th of July, 2020 and on very next day i.e. 9 July, 2020 he was
arrested and presently under confinement.

12. That the ulterior motives of the prosecution are also clear
from the fact that during the confinement of the petitioner, the
prosecution under the coercion and pressure forcibly got the
petitioner to sign plea bargain application in order to get the
offence admitted by the petitioner. It is submitted that the plea
bargain application was signed without consent of the petitioner
and hence the same has no effect in the eyes of law.

13. That subsequent to the dismissing the bail of the petitioner

by the learned Accountability Court, Sukkar, vide order dated
27.11.2021, the petitioner moved post arrest Bail vide Crl. Bail
Application No.257 of 2021 before Division Bench of Hon`ble
High Court of Sindh at Sukkur Bench and the same was
declined vide order 9.3.2022. Hence, this petition on the
following grounds:

GROUNDS

A. That the impugned Order passed by the Hon`ble High

Court of Sindh at Sukkur Bench is not sustainable in law
as the same has been passed by ignoring the material
flaws in NAB Reference as well as in investigation report,
which clearly reflects that the Petitioner above named is
absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated by the
NAB with malafide intention and ulterior motives.

B. That learned Hon`ble High Court of Sindh at Sukkur

Bench while passing impugned order has failed to
consider malafide intention of the prosecution vividly clear
from the fact that the prosecution itself states in para 10 of
the investigation report, that at the time of inspection of
PRCs/PWCs carried out on 2nd & 3rd May, of 2019 by the
Investigation Officer along with government
officers/officials in the presence of Judicial Magistrate of
District Naushehroferoze, wherein it was found that only
1706 bags [each 100 kg] of wheat were available in govt.
stock, whereas the Food Department entered into an
agreement on 26th July, 2019 with the Petitioner for
shifting of 200,000 bags of wheat from District
Naushehroferoze to Karachi. This act on the part of the
Food Department was tainted with ulterior motives for
shifting the burden of missing bags upon the petitioner. In
this regard, the documents were also engineered /
Page 6 of 12
 prepared to make the petitioner scapegoat. It is apparent
that when it has already come on surface through the
inspection of the stock by Investigation Officer under the
supervision of learned Judicial Magistrate that there was
stock of only 1706 bags [each 100 kg] how the contract is
entered into by the Food Department with the petitioner
for shifting of 200,000/- bags. Hence, the instant matter
requires further inquiry and on this ground alone the
petitioner is liable to be enlarged on bail.

C. That learned Hon`ble High Court of Sindh at Sukkur

Bench has failed to take into account that the Petitioner
was awarded the contract of transportation with the Food
Department, however as per NAB’s Reference even prior
to the execution of such contract almost all the wheat was
already embezzled and misappropriated. Hence, how can
on tentative assessment, any case of misappropriation, be
made out against the Petitioner, who as per NAB
reference could not transport due to non-availability of the
Wheat stock.

D. That learned Hon`ble High Court of Sindh at Sukkur

Bench, while passing the impugned order has wrongly
relied upon the tabulation, shown by the NAB in respect of
shortage of wheat stock reached at Landhi, Karachi from
Nosheroferoze, surprisingly the learned Division Bench
escaped notice that the same tabulation has been
prepared by the Food Department on the basis of bilties
and GP-13 forms which have admittedly been declared
fake by the prosecution. In this regard para 7 of the
Investigation Report is relevant.

E. That the learned Hon`ble High Court of Sindh at Sukkur

Bench while passing the impugned order has failed to
take into account that the sole purpose to engineer the
above said documents i.e bilties and GP-13 forms, was to
implicate the petitioner in the false crime for saving the
skin of actual culprits. Such position is supported by the
facts mentioned in the investigation report that these
documents were first time produced / handed over by the
Food Department to I.O NAB in the month of September
2020 only.

F. That while passing the impugned order, learned Hon`ble

High Court of Sindh at Sukkur Bench has failed to

Page 7 of 12
 consider that the shortage of wheat shown by prosecution
was calculated by the investigation officer is based upon
DR-1 (Daily Report ) dated 31.8.2019, which reflects the
wheat stock for the year 2016-17. However, the contract
awarded to the Petitioner for shifting the wheat stock was
of the year 2017-18 which was admittedly short prior to
awarding the contract to the Petitioner. Hence, the case is
of further inquiry.

G. That the learned Hon`ble High Court of Sindh at Sukkur

Bench, while passing the impugned order has failed to
take into account that there is no evidence connecting the
petitioner`s PRC/Mahmoodia Flour Mills for shortage of
any wheat.

H. That while passing the impugned order, learned Hon`ble

High Court of Sindh at Sukkur Bench has departed from
the settled principle of law that when all the accused
persons / beneficiaries have already been granted bail
then the petitioner as a rule of consistency, was also
entitled to the grant of bail, otherwise the same will
amount to discrimination and in violation of Article 25 of
the Constitution of Pakistan.

I. That learned Hon`ble High Court of Sindh at Sukkur

Bench has erred in law while declining the bail relying
upon the dossier/record which was neither part and parcel
of the NAB reference nor of the investigation report.

J. That the learned Division Bench of Hon`ble High Court

erred in law by not considering the flaws of the
prosecution case, which are apparent from the fact that no
memo / inspection report of either 2nd or 3rd May, 2019
purportedly carried out under the supervision of learned
Judicial Magistrate, Nausheroferoze has been brought on
record which creates serious doubts and it is settled
principle of law that benefit of doubt even at the bail stage
shall go to the Petitioner. Therefore, the petitioner is liable
to the grant of bail.

K. That the learned Division bench of Hon`ble High Court of

Sindh at Sukkur bench has further failed to take in to
account that the calculations made by the Investigation
Officer are bloated / illogical and cannot be justified in any
manner whatsoever, therefore, the accumulated alleged
huge amount against the petitioner is nothing but figment
Page 8 of 12
 of imagination of the I.O besides malafide and it is settled
principle of law that ipsi dixit of the police / law
enforcement agency is not binding upon the Courts of Law
at the bail stage, Hon’ble Court has to make tentative
assessment in order to decide the bail application.

L. That while passing the impugned order, the learned

Division bench of Hon`ble High Court of Sindh at Sukkur
bench did not consider that the allegations in respect of
alleged embezzlement in Mehmoodia Flour Mill is
absolutely false as there is no any complaint from any
corner about the shortage of wheat in the said Mill.
Moreover, as per government policy when any Mill is
made PRC, strict criteria and standards of Wheat Policy is
enforced wherein, paras 28 to 31 speak volume. Hence,
Mehmoodia Flour Mills being PRC was under the Wheat
Policy which was under the strict monitoring of the
government officials who never complained of any
irregularity / embezzlement or misappropriation of wheat
in Mehmoodia Flour Mill. Hence, the allegations of
embezzlement or misappropriation are false and
concocted which creates serious doubts/dents in the
prosecution story. Even otherwise, neither it is claimed,
nor was any document filed with Reference that IO ever
inspected the said Flour Mill and found any shortage of
wheat in comparison to the report of Food Department
officer.

M. That the learned Division Bench of Hon`ble High Court of

Sindh at Sukkur Bench has failed to take in to account
that the rate of wheat bag calculated/applied by the
Investigation officer is prime example of the malafide on
part of the prosecution as the same is contrary to the
government rate issued in the year 2019. Moreover, the
same has only been done to show the huge amount
against the petitioner for ulterior motives in order not only
to show so called efficiency of the prosecution but to
mount pressure upon the petitioner. It is submitted that
mere involving alleged huge amount is no ground for
refusal of bail.

N. That learned Hon`ble High Court of Sindh at Sukkur

Bench has failed to take into account that the petitioner is
behind the bar for 20 months for the alleged offence to
which he has no concern whatsoever and further the

Page 9 of 12
 petitioner is neither criminal or has any previous criminal
record on his account.

O. That learned Hon`ble High Court of Sindh at Sukkur

Bench has failed to take into account the evidence on the
basis of which the Petitioner has been nominated is on
surmises and conjecture and does not make out any
offence against the Petitioner. There is no evidence
against the Petitioner and there is no likelihood of his
conviction. The entire process is tainted with malafide and
an abuse of the process of law. No involvement of the
petitioner has been made out.

P. That learned Hon`ble High Court of Sindh at Sukkur

Bench has failed to take into account that withholding of
bail amounts to punishment without judgment. In such
circumstances, this Honourable Court may graciously
grant bail to the Petitioner to enable him to prepare his
defense properly.

Q. That learned Hon`ble High Court of Sindh at Sukkur

Bench has failed to take in account that at the bail stage
the law cannot be stretched in favour of the prosecution
and benefit of doubt, if any, must go in favor of the
accused, even at bail stage.

R. That the learned Hon`ble High Court of Sindh at Sukkur

Bench has failed to take into account that the entire case
is based upon documentary evidence which are in
custody of the prosecution, hence if the bail is granted to
the Petitioner, there was no probability of petitioner to
temper the evidence or record.

S. That learned Hon`ble High Court of Sindh at Sukkur

Bench has failed to take into account that the Petitioner is
neither a criminal, nor an absconder but, a respectable
citizen of Pakistan, hence, there is no probability of his
absconding. He is entitled to fundamental rights as
guaranteed under the Constitution.

T. That learned Hon`ble High Court of Sindh at Sukkur

Bench has failed to take into account that the custody of
wheat at all times is in the control of the Food Department
and as per the transport contract, in case of any loss or
shortage, upon notice of shortage from Food Department,
the Petitioner was either to pay the price of wheat with fine
Page 10 of 12
 of Rs.2 per KG or was required to replace the short
quantity, hence no loss was caused to the National
Exchequer by the Petitioner.

U. That learned Hon`ble High Court of Sindh at Sukkur

Bench failed to take into account that while investigating
the matter the IO/prosecution purposefully did not visit the
Petitioner`s Flour Mill. However, despite the said admitted
position, still maliciously IO chose to raise presumptive
claims/demands against the Petitioner on the basis of
Food Department’s report, which on the fact of it, is fake
and fabricated.

V. That financially, socially and emotionally, the Petitioner

and his family has suffered immensely due to no fault on
his part. Already, he has suffered a lot and his whole
family life has been disturbed, he is the sole bread earner
for his family, his business and reputation has been
seriously marred. If in trial, he is acquitted then who will be
responsible for the sufferings of the Petitioner and his
family and old parents. Hence, the principal; Bail not Jail.

W. That if the Bail is granted, the Petitioner shall not abscond

and will comply with the Court Orders and will continue to
participate in the trial.

X. That the Petitioner is ready to furnish solvent surety to the

satisfaction of this Hon’ble Court.

Y. That the petitioner craves leave to this Hon’ble Court to

urge further grounds at the time of hearing the instant
petition. 

PRAYER

It is prayed on behalf of the Petitioner above named that

this Honorable Court may be pleased to grant leave to appeal to
the petitioner and grant him bail.

DRAWN BY FILED BY

Page 11 of 12
_________________ __________________
Advocate Advocate-on-Record
Supreme Court of Pakistan Supreme Court of Pakistan
Islamabad Islamabad

Dated: -03-2022

CERTIFICATE:-

Certified under instructions that prior to this no other Crl.

PLA against the impugned order of the Hon`ble High Court of
Sindh at Karachi, was filed by the Petitioner before this
Honourable Court.

Advocate-on-Record

Page 12 of 12