KARACHI: The Sindh High Court (SHC) has rejected the application of one Mohammad Zubair Langrial for his post arrest bail; he was arrested for fraudulently taking goods out of country though manipulated documents.
According to details, a Deputy Director of Trade Development Authority without observing complete formalities granted registration to four proprietary concerns under the relevant S.R.O. for exporting gold jewelry, silver jewelry, precious / semi-precious stone, platinum jewelry etc. The said officer further in connivance with the proprietor of the said firms issued authorization to export against bogus E-forms of the branches of the various financial institutions which did not exist and consequently the said proprietary concerns exported gold which caused total loss of Rs.35.239 billion account of non-repatriation of sale proceed.
Zubair Sangrial filed goods declarations with custom department knowingly that each consignment‘s goods declaration is based on Fake documents as the applicant made / prepared such fake document in collusion with the exporters.
Counsel appearing for the applicant/accused contended that the job of the clearing and forwarding agent is only to file a good declaration after receipt of documents from the exporter and he is not required to verify as to whether such documents are genuine or fake.
It is further contended that at the most it is a case of non-repatriation of export proceed and the charges leveled against the applicant of smuggling cannot sustain.
Standing Counsel duly assisted by Inspector Siraj Panhwar, investigating Officer has contended that the applicant was not involved in merely fling good declarations but he used to type forged form-E, and during investigation on his pointing typewriter from which form-E were typed has been recovered. It was next contended that the exporters on whose behalf the applicant had filed good declarations do not exist.
After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, perusal of the record as well as the cited provisions of the Customs Act, the Court noted that there appears to be sufficient material with the prosecution to connect the applicant with the commission of crime.