KARACHI, Sept 1: A full bench of the Sindh High Court will decide whether the Anti-Corruption Establishment (ACE) can register a first information report (FIR) without holding a formal inquiry first.

The order was passed on Friday by a division bench, comprising Chief Justice Sabihuddin Ahmed and Justice Yasmeen Abbasy, on a petition moved by three office-bearers of the Architects Co-operative Housing Society through Advocate Syed Saeeduddin Nasir.

A provincial government anti-corruption committee, headed by the chief secretary and consisting of 10 provincial secretaries, directed the ACE that the office-bearers be booked for corruption.

Aggrieved by the decision, they filed a petition saying that they were not public servants in contemplation of the law and that an SHC division bench held in 2002 that a regular inquiry must precede the registration of an FIR by the ACE. They said no inquiry had been held and at least they had not been associated if an inquiry had been conducted.

Contesting the petition, Additional Advocate-General M Ahmed Pirzada argued that office-bearers of co-op societies had been declared public servants by Section 65-B of the Co-operative Societies Act.

As for inquiry, there was no such stipulation under the Prevention of Corruption Act or the rules made thereunder. Rule 2 (g) of the Anti-Corruption Rules empowered the establishment’s competent authority either to hold an inquiry or to order registration of a criminal case or to drop a case after investigation or order departmental action.

An inquiry was not a condition precedent to registration of an FIR nor was omission to conduct an inquiry a bar to registration of a criminal case. Investigations follow registration of an FIR and do not precede it as held by the division bench judgment cited at the bar, the AAG maintained.

The bench remarked that it was inclined to agree with the contention raised by AAG and ordered that a larger bench be constituted to decide the matter.

COLLECTOR SUMMONED: Another division bench, comprising Justices M. Mujibullah Siddiqui and Faisal Arab, issued a notice to the customs collector of model collectorate for Sept 7 in a contempt petition.

A petition was filed by M/s Indus Battery against the customs refusal to entertain an offer under Section 25A of the Customs Act for purchase of consignment of dry battery cells imported by three firms.

The high court told the customs authorities in August that following failure of the importers to file ‘goods declaration’ within the prescribed period they were left with no option but to auction the consignments. The authorities, however, released the consignment to the importers.