KARACHI: The Sindh High Court (SHC) on Monday dismissed a pre-arrest bail application of two officials of the Sindh Building Control Authority (SBCA) in an extortion case.
SBCA deputy director Syed Ovais Hussain and Inspector Ziaur Rehman, through their counsel, moved the SHC after an antiterrorism court had turned down their request for the bail.
Both the applicants, along with some other officials of the SBCA, had been booked in a case registered at the Preedy police station for allegedly extorting money from a local builder and causing damage to his project in June.
A two-judge bench headed by Justice Agha Faisal turned down the application and observed that the counsel for the applicants had been unable to make out a fit case for grant of the extraordinary concession of the pre-arrest bail.
It also noted that there were serious allegations of extortion by functionaries of the regulatory authority itself and the record suggested that part of the demanded money demanded had even been received.
“This matter pertains to allegations of extortion perpetrated by officials of the Sindh Building Control Authority etc., against developers / builders in Karachi. It is specificated in the FIR that functionaries of the SBCA approached the site and threatened to demolish the project unless the amount demanded was provided thereto, notwithstanding all the requisite permissions etc., said to have been provided to the accused”, it added.
The bench in its judgement also observed that the deputy director was directly nominated in the FIR with a specific role while it was submitted that another applicant was implicated vide an interim challan while no copy of any charge sheet interim or otherwise was disclosed before the SHC.
It noted that as per the arguments of the lawyer for the applicant, pre-arrest bail at the interim stage was the right of the applicants and any appreciation of the grounds etc., by the court was only merited at the stage of confirmation of bail.
“Respectfully, we find ourselves unable to concur, as such a mechanical proposition would endanger the enshrined principles governing consideration of pre-arrest bail,” it added.
The bench said the lawyer had been unable to demonstrate any infirmity with the order of the trial court denying the pre-arrest bail to the main applicant while as far as the other applicant was concerned, the pertinent record, imperative for this court to appraise, albeit tentatively, while considering an application for the pre-arrest bail had not been disclosed.
Under such circumstances, the relief of the pre-arrest bail could not be granted blindly, it added.
Published in Dawn, Aug 1st, 2023
