Case Details

Citation(s)
2022 SLG 906 2022 SLD 906 2022 PTD 1040
Sindh High Court
Constitutional Petitions Nos. D-631 to D-636, D-2632 of 2010and D- 3051 of 2012, decided on 11th March, 2022, Dates ofhearing: 20th January, 10th and 21st February, 2022
MUHAMMAD IQBAL KALHORO, JUSTICE, ABDUL MOBEEN LAKHO, JUSTICE
Raj Ali Wahid for Petitioner (in Constitutional Petition No. D-2632 of 2010). Ovais Ali Shah for Petitioners (in Constitutional Petition No. D-632 of 2010). Nadeem Yaseen for Petitioner (in Constitutional Petition No. D-3501 of 2012).

TAHIR ASHRAF DURRANI AND OTHERS

VS

FEDERAL INVESTIGATION AGENCY, THROUGH DIRECTOR GENERAL, F.I.A., HEADQUARTER, PESHAWAR MORR, ISLAMABAD AND OTHERS

Law: Income Tax Ordinance, 2001

Section: 227

Law: Pakistan Penal Code, 1860

Section: 409,419,420,468,471

Law: Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947

Section: 5(2)

Law: Sales Tax Act, 1990

Section: 31

Income Tax Ordinance (XLIX of 2001)---S.227- Sales Tax Act (VII of 1990), S. 51--Penal Code (XLV of 1860), 409, 419, 420, 468 , 471--Prevention of Corruption Act (II of 1947), S.5(2)--Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), S. 173-- Constitution of Pakistan, Art. 199--Constitutional petition-- Quashing of proceedings--Prior approval of Federal Board of Revenue-- Petitioners were serving in Federal Board of Revenue and Income Tax department--Federal Investigating Agency initiated investigations against petitioners for committing criminal breach of trust, cheating, forgery and misconduct--Contention of petitioners was that under S.51 of Sales Tax Act, 1990 and under S.227 of Income Tax Ordinance, 2001, suit or criminal prosecution against them was barred unless a prior approval was granted in that respect by Federal Board of Revenue--Validity--Province under the petitioners related to only official acts, orders or anything done in good faith by the officials performing duty under those laws, rules, instructions or directions made or issued thereunder--Petitioners were not charged for committing contravention much the same embraced by those laws, etc. that needed an approval in advance from the Board for an action against them under some other laws-- Petitioners were alleged to have fake companies and directed tax return refunds to such companies’ bogus accounts and accounts of non-existent persons with a predetermined mind and Bank officials colluding with them in the spree-- Whole episode was full of mens rea and was an outcome of proclivity to commit actus reus with plan base in approach and consequences-- Such acts and ensuing effects were nowhere defined or covered or comprehended by Sales Tax Act, 1990 and Income Tax Ordinance, 2001, therefore not protected under aforesaid provisions nor could such construction even otherwise be construed running under other laws--High Court declined to interfere in criminal proceedings pending against petitioners--Constitutional petition was dismissed, in circumstances. PLD 2020 Sindh 601; Syed Mushahid Shah’s case 2017 SCMR 1218; 2016 SCMR 447; 1993 SCMR 71; PLD 2002 Kar. 464; 2008 YLR 387; 2009 CLD 1422; 2018 YLR 2624; 1990…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register

Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492