IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PAKISTAN 
(APPELLATE JURISDICTION) 
 
 
PRESENT: 
MR. JUSTICE UMAR ATA BANDIAL, CJ 
MR. JUSTICE SAYYED MAZAHAR ALI AKBAR NAQVI 
 
CRIMINAL PETITION NOs. 1086-L & 1143-L OF 2022 
(On appeal against the order dated 22.06.2022 passed by the Lahore 
High Court, Lahore in Crl. Misc. Nos. 29415/B & 81584/B of 2022) 
 
Naeem Qadir Sheikh 
 
 
 
 
(In Cr.P. 1086-L/2022) 
Muhammad Zaigham Ali 
 
 
 
 
(In Cr.P. 1143-L/2022) 
 
 
 
 
 
 
… Petitioners 
VERSUS 
The State etc  
 
 
 
 
 
(In both cases) 
 
 
 
 
 
… Respondents 
 
For the Petitioners: 
Mr. Aftab Ahmad Bajwa, ASC a/w petitioner 
 
(In Cr.P. 1086-L/2022) 
 
 
 
Mian Muhammad Rauf, ASC a/w petitioner 
 
(In Cr.P. 1143-L/2022) 
 
 
For the State:  
 
Mr. Khurram Khan, Addl. P.G 
Mr. 
Abdul 
Majeed, 
Deputy 
Director, 
Anti 
Corruption 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Date of Hearing: 
 
30.09.2022 
 
ORDER 
 
SAYYED MAZAHAR ALI AKBAR NAQVI, J.- This order shall dispose of the above 
titled Criminal Petitions as they are directed against the same consolidated 
order. 
2. 
 
Through the instant petitions under Article 185(3) of the 
Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973, the petitioners have 
assailed the order dated 22.06.2022 passed by the learned Single Judge of the 
Lahore High Court, Lahore, with a prayer to grant pre-arrest bail in case 
registered vide FIR No. 46/2020 dated 26.12.2020 under Sections 
409/420/467/468/471/201 PPC read with Section 5(2) of the Prevention of 
Corruption Act, 1947, at Police Station ACE/HQ Region-A, Lahore, in the 
interest of safe administration of criminal justice. 
CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 1086-L & 1143-L OF 2022 
2
3. 
 
Briefly stated the prosecution story as narrated in the crime 
report is that pursuant to a letter received from Director Excise & Taxation, 
Region-C Lahore, it transpired that scanned record of 4397 vehicles was 
missing 
and 
not 
available. 
Allegedly 
this 
record 
was 
either 
misappropriated/embezzled or was not scanned to conceal the bogus 
registration of commercial vehicles by the petitioners and the co-accused, 
being officials of the Excise and Taxation Department. Hence, the instant case.   
4. 
 
At the very outset, learned counsel for the petitioners contended 
that the petitioners have been falsely roped in this case against the actual facts 
and circumstances. It is contended that allegation of corruption, misconduct 
and misappropriation has not been attributed to the petitioners, as such, 
offences mentioned in the FIR do not attract in the present case. It is argued 
that the scam of bogus registration pertains to year 2015-2018 whereas 
petitioner Naeem Qadir Sheikh was posted as ETO in the year 2019. Further 
contended that petitioner Naeem Qadir Sheikh processed printing of 80 
registration certificates and the scanned record of all these vehicles is 
available. Contends that neither there was any beneficiary of the alleged 
transaction nor is there any allegation that the petitioners have ever received 
any monetary advantage. Contends that one of the petitioners being low 
grade employee has been made scapegoat whereas the senior officers have 
been exonerated. Lastly it has been contended that co-accused of the 
petitioners have been granted bail by the court of competent jurisdiction, 
therefore, following the rule of consistency, the petitioners also deserve the 
same treatment to be meted out.  
5. 
 
On the other hand, learned Law Officer has though defended the 
impugned order but admitted that there is no material against the petitioners 
available on the record. It has been contended that the petitioners’ co-accused 
in connivance with each other have actively participated in bogus registration 
of a large number of vehicles, therefore, they being co-employee do not 
deserve any leniency by this Court.  
6. 
 
We have heard learned counsel for the parties at some length 
and have perused the available record.  
CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 1086-L & 1143-L OF 2022 
3
 
 
Perusal of the record reveals that a scam regarding bogus 
registration of 4397 vehicles was surfaced from the office of Excise & Taxation, 
Region-C, Lahore. The petitioner Naeem Qadir Sheikh was posted as Excise & 
Taxation Officer (ETO) in the year 2019 whereas the petitioner Muhammad 
Zaigham Ali was posted as Data Entry Operator. During the tenure of 
petitioner Naeem Qadir Sheikh, he approved printing of 80 registration 
certificates out of which 14 were found to be bogus, hence, their documents 
were cancelled whereas 27 were found to be in accordance with law while 39 
are still in process of investigation. It is the case of petitioner Naeem Qadir 
Sheikh that he approved printing of registration certificates of the vehicles, 
whose verification, registration fee and token tax had already been deposited 
before his posting. According to him, the scanning record of all these 80 files is 
available and was also provided to the Investigating Officer. It is an admitted 
fact that he was posted as ETO in the year 2019 whereas the scam of bogus 
registration pertains to 2015-2018. The Investigating Officer, present in Court, 
stated before this Court that uptill now the petitioner has no nexus with the 
scam, which is under investigation. As far as the case of petitioner Muhammad 
Zaigham Ali is concerned, it is his case that he was merely a Data Entry 
Operator, who was entrusted with the job of punching the data in system. It is 
the case of the petitioners that as per SOPs, the basic duty to (i) examine the 
documents and verify the particulars of the vehicles entered in the system 
with the original file, (ii) physical examination of the vehicle, and (iii) 
submission of the file after complete satisfaction of the papers of the motor 
vehicle was of the Inspector and not the petitioner. We have been informed 
that the all the officers, who were nominated in the crime report, have been 
exonerated. This fact prima facie fortifies the stance of the petitioners that 
they have been made scapegoat. The co-accused of the petitioners namely 
Adeel Amjad, who has been ascribed a similar role has been granted post 
arrest bail by the learned Trial Court. The department filed petition before the 
High Court seeking cancellation of bail but the same was dismissed vide order 
dated 19.01.2022. The said order has not been challenged before this Court 
meaning thereby that it has attained finality. In such like situation, when it is 
admitted fact that the role ascribed to the petitioners cannot be distinguished 
from the co-accused who has been granted post-arrest bail by the court of 
CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 1086-L & 1143-L OF 2022 
4
competent jurisdiction which remains unchallenged, any order by this Court 
on any technical ground that the consideration for pre-arrest bail and post-
arrest bail are entirely on different footing, would be only limited upto the 
arrest of the petitioners because of the reason that soon after their arrest they 
would become entitled for the concession of post-arrest bail on the plea of 
consistency. Reliance is placed on the cases reported as Muhammad Ramzan 
Vs. Zafarullah (1986 SCMR 1380), Kazim Ali and others Vs. The State and others 
(2021 SCMR 2086), Muhammad Kashif Iqbal Vs. The State and another (2022 
SCMR 821) and Javed Iqbal Vs. The State through Prosecutor General of Punjab 
and another (2022 SCMR 1424).  It is now established that while granting pre-
arrest bail, the merits of the case can be touched upon by the Court. Reliance 
is placed on Miran Bux Vs. The State (PLD 1989 SC 347), Sajid Hussain @ Joji 
Vs. The State (PLD 2021 SC 898), Javed Iqbal Vs. The State (PLD 2022 SCMR 
1424) & Muhammad Ijaz Vs. The State (2022 SCMR 1271). In these 
circumstances, it is the Trial Court who after recording of evidence would 
decide about the guilt or otherwise of the petitioners and no useful purpose 
would be served by sending the petitioners behind the bars for an indefinite 
period. Prima facie there are sufficient grounds to take into consideration that 
the case of the petitioners is fully covered by Section 497(2) Cr.P.C. calling for 
further inquiry into their guilt.  
7. 
 
For what has been discussed above, we convert these petitions 
into appeals, allow them and set aside the impugned order dated 22.06.2022 
to the extent of the petitioners. The petitioners are admitted to bail subject to 
their furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs.200,000/- each with one surety 
each in the like amount to the satisfaction of learned Trial Court.  
 
 
 
 
 
 
CHIEF JUSTICE 
 
JUDGE 
Lahore, the  
30th of September, 2022 
Approved For Reporting 
Khurram 
