1 
CRIMINAL PETITIONs NO.197-K to 204-K, 211-K to 221-K AND 230-K OF 2019 
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PAKISTAN  
(Appellate Jurisdiction) 
 
 
PRESENT:  
MR. JUSTICE MUSHIR ALAM 
MR. JUSTICE FAISAL ARAB 
MR. JUSTICE QAZI MUHAMMAD AMIN AHMED 
 
CRIMINAL PETITIONs NO.197-K to 204-K, 
211-K to 221-K AND 230-K OF 2019  
(Against order dated 10.10.2019 passed by High Court of 
Sindh, Hyderabad Bench, in Crl.B.A.S-582 to S-587, S-589, 
S-590, S-537 to S-543, S-591, S-593, S-598, S-599 and S-
577/2019) 
 
Gulshan Ali Solangi  
(in Cr.Ps.197-K to 
203-K/19) 
Ali Asghar Panhwar 
(in Cr.P.204-K/19) 
Muhammad Hussain Khokhar and another 
(in Cr.Ps.211-K to 
217-K/19) 
Allah Bachio Panhwar 
(in Cr.P.218-K/19) 
Inam Hussain Abro 
(in Cr.P.219-K /19) 
Muzafar Ali Jaiser 
(in Cr.P.220-K /19) 
Ghulam Muhammad Kakepoto 
(in Cr.P.221-K/19) 
Ghulam Murtaza Butt 
(in Cr.P.230-K/19) 
 
…Petitioner(s) 
 
 
                                        VERSUS 
The State thr. P.G. Sindh 
 
 
…Respondent(s) 
 
 
For the Petitioner(s): 
(in Cr.Ps.197-K to 203-K/19) 
(in Cr.P.204-K/19) 
(in Cr.Ps.211-K to 221-K/19) 
(in Cr.P.230-K/19) 
 
Mr. Ahmed Ali Ghumro, ASC 
Mr. Bashir Ahmed Almani, ASC 
Mr. Abdul Mujeeb Pirzada, Sr. ASC 
Syed Shafqat Ali Shah Masoomi, ASC 
along with petitioners. 
 
 
For the State: 
Ms. Rahat Ahsan, Addl. PG Sindh. 
 
(in all cases) 
 
Date of Hearing: 
05.12.2019 
 
O R D E R 
 
 
QAZI MUHAMMAD AMIN AHMED. Petitioners, though 
nominated in different crime reports, nonetheless, are identically 
placed inasmuch as they have been declined judicial protection of 
anticipatory bail by the High Court of Sindh through various 
2 
CRIMINAL PETITIONs NO.197-K to 204-K, 211-K to 221-K AND 230-K OF 2019 
orders of even date i.e. 10.10.2019. Controversy arises out of a 
scam detected in Dadu District when thousands of bags alongwith 
wheat were found missing/displaced from designated places. 
Inquiries conducted by Anti Corruption Establishment, found the 
petitioners, 
having 
been 
systematically 
involved 
in 
the 
misappropriation, resulting into a colossal loss to the public 
exchequer.  
2. 
 
Gulshan Ali Solangi, Head Clerk in the Department is 
arrayed in as many as seven crime reports; alongside him, 
Muhammad Hussain Khokhar and Mahram Pechuhu, private 
individuals, being beneficiaries are on board in all the cases.  
Ali Asghar Panhwar, Ghulam Murtaza Butt, Ghulam Hussain 
Kakepoto, Muzaffar Ali Jaiser, Inam Hussain Abro, Food Inspectors 
and Allah Bachio, Food Supervisor have been distinctly accused in 
the above cases. In this common backdrop, these petitions are 
being decided through this single order.  
3. 
 
In the face of findings recorded by the Investigation 
Officers, on the basis of preliminary inquiry held on the strength of 
various 
statements, 
learned 
counsel 
for 
the 
petitioners, 
nonetheless, in a unison and with vehemence, controverted the 
accusation. It is argued that in order to avoid possible damage to 
the stock due to poor storage conditions, it was shifted to different 
places without an axe to grind and as such being blameless, 
petitioners are being hounded on a trump up charge for purposes 
far from being bonafide, a position contested faithfully by the 
learned Law Officer. 
4. 
 
Heard. Record perused. 
3 
CRIMINAL PETITIONs NO.197-K to 204-K, 211-K to 221-K AND 230-K OF 2019 
5. 
 
Except for the two, all the petitioners are in the service 
of the Food Department, posted in positions at the places, 
wherefrom huge wheat stock vanished, subsequently spotted at 
outlets being run and managed by private entrepreneur; 
explanation offered by the accused being preposterous merits 
outright rejection.  
 
Grant of pre-arrest bail is a remedy rooted into equity; at a 
cost to hamper the investigation, this judicial protection is 
extended, solely to save the innocent from the horrors of abuse of 
process of law with a view to protect his dignity and honour. It 
cannot be granted in every run of the mill criminal case, 
particularly to the accused confronting prima facie charges 
structured upon material/evidence, warranting custody, that too, 
on the basis of positions/ pleas, verification whereof, is consequent 
upon recording of evidence. Being in line with the law declared by 
this Court, view taken by the High Court, does not calls for 
interference. Petitions fail, leave refused.   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
JUDGE 
 
 
 
JUDGE 
 
 
 
 
 
ISLAMABAD 
5th December, 2019 
Azmat/                               “Not approved for reporting” 
JUDGE 
 
   
4 
CRIMINAL PETITIONs NO.197-K to 204-K, 211-K to 221-K AND 230-K OF 2019