naveed tariq

Kindly refer to final report submitted by Mr. Shah Rukh

Khan Niazi Assistant Director (Investigation) ACE Lahore Region

Lahore.

Brief facts of the case are that Case FIR No. 541/2009,

offence u/s 420/468/471 PPC, Police Station Kahna Lahore was

registered and investigated by local police and report u/s 173 Cr.

PC was submitted by the local police after having found the

accused guilty of the offence ans submit report u/s 173 Cr. PC to

the prosecutor but report u/s 173 Cr. PC was sent back with the

observation by the Assistant District Public Prosecutor, with thye

observation that public servant i.e. Muhammad Slaeem Patwari is

involved in the commission of offence. So, the case was

transferred to this establishment. The accused public servant has

been expired as per report of IO of local police namely Muhammad

Akram ASI. The remaining accused persons are on bail.

Judicial action as recommended by the IO in his final

report may be approved against Nazir Ahmad, Abdul Rauf,

Muhammad Sharif, Sadiq and Muhammad Akbar.

Accused Muhammad Saleem Patwari has been expired

so criminal proceeding against him automatically stand abated.

However, Investigating Officer before submission of

challan u/s 173 Cr. PC, following documents may be taken into

possession:-

1. Statement of present Halqa Patwari.

2. Attested copies of mutations in question.

3. Death Certificate of Muhammad Saleem Patwari

(Deceased)

MALIK NAVEED TARIQ (ADP)Anti Corruption Establishment,

Lahore Region, Lahore.L/DDP:-

Kindly refer to Para No. 12 to 17-N and final report dated

11.05.2012 submitted by Mr. Raees Ahmad Khan Circle Officer

ACE Head Quarter Lahore.

Earlier final report was submitted by Mr. SD Khalid the

then DDI-III, ACE Lahore, for approval of judicial action against 12

accused but legal branch raised some legal objection that

determine the role of each accused person, collect the evidence

and record their statements u/s 161 Cr. PC. Meanwhile after the

transfer of Mr. SD Khalid the then DDI-III, ACE Lahore, file was

transferred to Circle Officer Head Quarter for removal of objection

raised by legal branch and submission of RFR.

I have examine the file and found that CO/IO has not

fulfill the requirement as raised by legal branch and record the

statement of only one accused namely Mushtaq Girdawar.

Investigating Officer is directed to determine the role of

each accused, record their statements u/s 161 Cr. PC, collect

attested copies of mutations and sale deeds in question and

submit RFR on merits, if agreed please.



Kindly refer to Para No. 5 to 7-N and revised final report dated

30.04.2012 submitted by Mr. Raees Ahmad Khan Circle Officer

ACE Head Quarter Lahore.

Earlier Judicial Action against Nasir Rauf, Muhammad

Arshad, Patwari, Muhammad Umair, Muhammad Akram and

Departmental action against Rasheed Ahmad, Patwari, Muhammad

Mansha, Girdawar, Saman Jan Tehsildar was approved by the

competent authority on 12.03.2012. Meanwhile Muhammad

Arshad, Patwari submitted an application before Worthy Director

stating, thathe was not called to submit his defense verion and in

he also submitted some reports of revenue officials in his favour,

on which Worthy Director ask Ciricle Officer Head Quarter for

comments/report who after recording the version of Muhammad

Arshad Patwari, submitted a revised final report declaring him

innocent in this case. IO has already submitted an incomplete

challan on 21.03.2012 in the court. Now he recommended to

submit the complete report u/s 173 Cr. PC, putting Muhammad

Arshad Patwari in coloumn No.2 of report u/s 173 Cr. PC.

I have gone through the record and final report dated

12.03.2012, I endorse the recommendation of the IO and I.O may

be directed to submit cancellation report u/s 173 Cr PC in the

Court of competent jurisdiction at the earliest, if agreed please.


Lahore Region, Lahore.

L/DDP:-

Kindly refer to Para No. 10 to 13-N and final report dated

15.05.2012 submitted by Mr. Hassan Raza Khan DDI ACE and Mr.

Raees Ahmad Khan Circle Officer ACE Head Quarter Lahore.

Earlier Judicial Action against Shahzad Ahmad constable

and Departmental action against Ghulam Abbas Inspector and Ijaz

Hussain Gillani DSP (Legal) was recommended by Mr. Riaz Ahmad

Assistant Director Investigation in his final report dated

12.04.2012, but subsequently His Lordship Mr. Justice Mazahir Ali

Akbar Naqvi called Worthy Director General ACE Punjab on

08.05.2012, who undertakes for constituting a team to investigate

the issue and submit report in this regard within seven days and

Worthy DG ACE Punjab constituted team comprising Mr. Hassan

Raza DDI ACE Lahore and Mr. Raees Ahmad Khan Circle Officer

Head Quarter, Lahore. They after conducting Investigation

submitted a Final Report Dated 15.05.2012 and they differ with

the opinion of previous IO and recommended Judicial Action

against Shahzad Ahmad constable, Ghulam Abbas Inspector and

dropped case against Ijaz Hussain Gillani DSP (Legal).

After examining the record it transpired that earlier on

09.02.2012 Mr. Zaffar Iqbal Judicial MagistrateSection-30,

discharged the accused namely Ghulam Abbas inspector on

09.02.2012 stating as under:-

“It is clear from the record that till yet no

material evidence has been collected against the accused

regarding the commission of offence with malafide

intention and it is not in the interest of justice to curtail his

liberty by sending him to judicial lock up. Hence, at this

juncture, he is discharged in this case. He is responsible

public servant and there is no chance of his escape. I.O.

may take legal action against him in accordance with law if

he finds any material evidence against him during

investigation. Accused be released if not required in any

other case.”

I have gone through the record and final report dated

15.05.2012, it reveals from order dated 25.11.2011 of Honorable

Lahore High Court, Lahore it was the responsibility of Ghulam

Abbas Inspector to hand over the parcel containing material

importanat documents himself, negligence and criminal

misconduct is available against both the accused namely Shahzad

Ahmad constable, Ghulam Abbas Inspector. Judical action against

Shahzad Ahmad constable has already been recommended. Now

investigating team has recommended Judicial Action against

Ghulam Abbas Inspector also and dropped case against Ijaz

Hussain Gillani DSP (Legal).

I endorse the recommendation of the investigating

team and recommend Judicial Action against Ghulam Abbas

Inspector and dropped case against Ijaz Hussain Gillani DSP

(Legal), if agreed please.



L/DDP:-

The final report, opinion of ADP & file have been perused. I

endorse the opinion of ADP to approve judicial action against Ghulam

Abbas, Inspector & to drop the case against the Ejaz Hussain Gilani, DSP

as he performed his duty diligently judicial action against Shahzad

Ahmed, Constable has already been approved.

DEPUTY DIRECTOR (PROSECUTION)Anti Corruption Establishment,


W/DIRECTOR:-

Kindly refer to final report dated 30.04.2012, submitted by Mr.

Shafaqat Ali circle officer, ACE Sheikhupura.

Brief facts of the case of that one Syed Basharat Ali

submitted an application before circle officer, ACE Sheikhupura for

raid against Sohail Ahmad Virk Patwari Halqa Madhkay on

23.04.2012

.

After getting permission from learned District & Sesions

Judge Sheikhupura, who deputed Mr. Rana Sohail Learned Judicial

Magistrate to conduct the raid as per law.

Learned Magistrate after conducting the raid ordered to

register a criminal case against the said accused and then in

compliance with the order of learned Judicial Magistrate Circle

Officer registered FIR No. 15/2012 offence u/s 161 PPC read with

5/2/47 PCA at Police Station ACE Sheikhupura.

Perusal of the record reveals that complainant has no

personal work with the accused and has personal grudge with the

accused Sohail Ahmad Virk Patwari and Learned Magistrate in his

raid proceeding at page 3 admitted that he was 10 feet away

when the complainant handed over the money and he has not

hear the conversation between them. According to the statement

of the accused Sohail Ahmad Virk Patwari, complainant has

borrowed Rs. 2000/0 from him, he further stated that complainant

called me and asked for returning my money back and when I

came he put the money in my pocket and the raiding party arrest

me without listening any conversation.

Previous motive behind the false implication of accused

has also been established during the course of investigation as it

has transpired from the record that complainant intended to get

transferred/inherited the land measuring 6 Murabas inherited by

his deceased brother. On the plea that the female legal heirs left

by the deceased are not Muslim. But the Patwari inherited the

property in accordance with shia law in their favour. So

complainant being aggrieved by this act of Patwari registered a

case against him.

During the course of investigation complainant differed

from his previous statement and filed an affidavit where in he

admitted that he has revenge against the accused he registered a

case against Sohail Ahmad Virk Patwari and now he is not

interested to pursue the case, he further stated that he has no

objection to drop the said case.

Circle Officer/IO has submitted his final report and

stated that prosecution is wastage of time and he recommended

to drop the case.

I do hereby agree with the opinion of IO and and

recommend to drop the case and intiate the proceeding u/s 182

Cr.PCagainst the complainant Syed Basharat Ali who wasted the

precious time of the agency, if agreed please. Hence, dropping the

case as recommended may be approved and I.O may be directed

to submit cancellation report u/s 173 Cr PC in the Court of

competent jurisdiction at the earliest.

Submitted for approval and further necessary action, if

agreed please.



The file as well as opinion of AD(P) has been examined.

The defense plea taken by the accused was firstly recorded by the

raiding Magistrate and is established from record i.e. mutation NO.

540 dated 18.05.2011 is also corroborated by the resiling affidavit

of complainant.

In view of the recommendations of AD(P) at para No. 16

are endorsed.

ASIF ANJUM WARRAICH (DDP)Anti Corruption Establishment,

Lahore Region, Lahore.W/DIRECTOR:-

Kindly refer to para no. 37 to 43, 54 to 56 and revised

final report submitted by Mr. Shafaqat Ali Circle Officer ACE

Sheikhupura.

Brief facts of the case are that complainant,

Muhammad Ijaz s/o Muhammad Latif filed a petition u/s 22-A & 22-

B Cr. PC alleging that he purchased 8-Kanals land from Sarfraz

Ahmad, General Attorney on behalf of Ghazanfar Ali, but the sale

deed was got registered from the original owner Ghazanfar Ali vide

Documents No. 13275, Book No.1, Volume No. 2548, Dated:

08.09.2005 and Halqa Patwari Gulfam Akhtar, after taking bribe

money entered mutation No. 3564 dated: 17.08.2005 in his favour

and same was attested by RO. He further alleged that Halqa

Patwari, Gulfam Akhtar with connivance of Ghazanfar Ali Seller,

Arif Hussain and Sarfraz Ahmad, prepare a forged Fard of his land

and sell the same to Arif Hussain through General Power of

Attorney vide Document No. 170 Book No.1, Volume No. 2733,

Dated 10.01.2007 and he entered mutation No. 3814 Dated

17.02.2007 accordingly. Halqa Patwari while preparing record of

rights in year 2006-2007, malafidely entered the no of junior

mutation No. 3814 of Arif Hussain inspite of his senior mutation

No. 3564.

After enquiry, case FIR No. 10/2010 dated 20.05.2010,

offence u/s 420/468/471/109 PPC read with section 5/2/47 PCA was

registered against Gulfam Akhtar Patwari, Sarfraz Ahmad General

Power of Attorney Ghazanfar Ali original Seller at PS ACE

Sheikhupura, it was further approved that role of Mr. Riasat Ali

Girdawar and Malik Sarfraz Naib Tehsildar shall be determined

during the investigation.

After completion of investigation, the then DDI-III

recommended Judicial action against Gulfam Akhtar Patwari,

Ghazanfar Ali Original Seller, Arif Hussain Purchaser and

departmental action against Malik Sarfraz Naib Tehsildar, Riasat

Ali Girdawar. the file was examined by ADL and DDL who differed

with the opinion of I/O. On their recommendations J/A was

approved against Gulfam Akhtar Patwari, Ghazanfar Ali

(Vendor/Beneficiary), Sarfraz Ahmad GPA and departmental action

against Riasat Ali Girdawar and Malik Sarfraz Naib Tehsildar.

After approval of Judicial Action bail before arrest was

moved by one accused namely Gulfam Akhtar which was

dismissed by Special Judge Anti-Corruption and Lahore High Court

Lahore as well.

Subsequently accused Gulfam Akhtar moved an

application to worthy Director General ACE Punjab for

reinvestigation on 16.12.2011 and complainant Muhammad Ijaz

also moved an application to worthy Director General ACE Punjab

for reinvestigation to determine the role of Malik Sarfraz Naib

Tehsildar, Riasat Ali Girdawar. On the said applications worthy

Director General ACE Punjab ordered for reinvestigation of the

case and the investigation again marked to Circle Officer ACE

Sheikhupura, who recorded the statements u/s 161 Cr. PC of

Muhammad Nawaz present Patwari Mouza Mandiali, Malik Rafaqat

Ali Present Naib-Tehsildar, Gulfam Akhtar (accused), Sarfraz

Ahmad GPA (accused), Malik Sarfraz Naib Tehsildar (accused) and

the statement of the complainant Muhammad Ijaz as well.

Statements of the complainant and prosecution witnesses wherein

fully corroborated the allegations leveled in the complainant.

Now Circle Officer has further recommended judicial

action against Sarfraz Naib Tehsildar, Malik Riasat Ali Girdawar

against whom D/A was approved. In this way, now I.O

recommends judicial action against all the accused Gulfam Akhtar

Patwari, Malik Sarfraz Naib Tehsildar, Riasat Ali Girdawar,

Ghazanfar Ali (Vendor/Beneficiary), Arif Hussain Purchaser. Judicial

action as recommended may be approved and I.O may be directed

to submit report u/s 173 Cr PC in the Court at the earliest.


agreed please.



Brief facts of the case of that a case FIR No. 514/2009

u/s 496-A, 380 PPC PS Chunian District Kasur was registered

against Muhammad Shammoon etc. The investigation was with

Fateh Sher ASI. The present complainant who is a real brother of

one of the accused of the said case, alleges that Fateh Sher, ASI,

demanded and received Rs. 370000/- to declare his brother

innocent in the said case but did not do the needful rather. The

said case was cancelled after investigation conducted by

Superintendent of Police District Kasur.

After preliminary enquiry No. 217/2010-KSR, FIR No.

18/2011 PS Anti Corruption Establishment, Kasur was registered.

Firstly the investigation was conducted by Circle Officer Anti

Corruption Establishment Kasur, who recorded the statements of

the complainant and prosecution witnesses wherein they fully

corroborated the allegations leveled in the complainant.

Afterwards the investigation wsa entrusted to DDI ACE, Lahore.

During the pendency of investigation the accused got pre-arrest

bail. During the hearing of bail petition, the complainant appeared

before the court and stated that his compromise has been affected

with the accused. On his statement, bail was confirmed by the

court.

Now DDI has recommended to approve judicial action.

As the pre-arrest bail has been confirmed by court and the court

has also recorded the statement of complainant. Hence, judicial

action as recommended may be approved and I.O may be directed

to submit report u/s 173 Cr PC in the Court at the earliest.


agreed please.



BEFORE MR. ISRAR AHMED LEARNED CONSULTANT (IV) OFFICE OF THE OMBUDSMAN PUNJAB LAHORE.

SUBJECT: REPORT/COMMENTS IN COMPLAINT NO. 1027/2012, BY MALIK IFTIKHAR AHMAD S/O MALIK FEROZ ALI R/O 179/D, GUJAR COLONY, CHUNGI AMARSIDHU, LAHORE.

Respectfully Sheweth:-

Kindly refer to subject cited above detail report/comments

are given as under:-.

Brief facts are that one Malik Iftikhar Ahmad has leveled

allegation of corruption against Qasim Shah Secretary Union Council No.

139, Green Town, Lahore etc vide written complaint No. 3022/2011.

After receiving complaint No. 3022/11, preliminary enquiry was

conducted and the said complaint was converted into regular inquiry

vide Enquiry No. 483/2011 and the same was entrusted to Mr. Riaz

Ahmad Assistant Director (Investigation), Anti-Corruption Establishment,

Lahore.

That after probing the matter on full length and hearing

both the parties Assistant Director (Inv) has recommended

departmental Action against the delinquents.

In view of abovementioned submissions it is most

respectfully prayed that the redressal of the complainant has been

made accordingly. The complaint in hand may be filed.

Malik Naveed Tariq (ADL) Representative

Anti Corruption Establishment,Lahore Region, Lahore.

Subject: REPORT IN COMPLAINT OF ZUBAIDA KHANUM VERSUS DIRECTOR, ANTI CORRUPTION ESTABLISHMETN, LAHORE BRFORE ISRAR AHMAD KHAN CONSULTANT-IV OFFICE OF OMBUDSMAN LAHORE.

Kindly refer to subject cited above, it is humbly submitted

that above mentioned complaint was fixed for hearing today i.e.

15.05.2012, in which next date of hearing is 06.06.2012. That I have

attended the office of learned consultant and Honorable Consultant has

directed to conclude the matter before 06.06.2012. (Original Notice No.

2604 Dated 07.05.2012 is attached)

That re-investigation of case FIR No. 239/11, Police Station

Kot Radha Kishan District Kasur is pending before the Circle Officer

Head Quarter, Lahore. Kindly direct the said officer to conclude the

matter before 06.06.2012 and submit his report on 06.06.2012.

Submitted for further necessary action please.

MALIK NAVEED TARIQ (ADL-V)Anti Corruption Establishment,


W/DDL

To,The Worthy Director,Anti-Corruption Establishment,Lahore Region, Lahore.

Subject: PROGRESS REPORT IN COMPLAINT NO. 1153/2012

Respected Sir,

It is respectfully submitted that I attended the court of Learned District and Sessions Judge, Lahore on 13-04-2012, in contempt petition / Application titled Shahid Siddique VS Director ACE, Lahore.

That detail report was submitted by Rana Tariq Mahmood Deputy Director Legal on 11.04.2012 as per direction of Learned District and Sessions Judge, Lahore.

That on 13-04-2012 Learned District and Sessions Judge, Lahore has passed an order and dismisses the said petition/Application. (Copy of orders is attached)

Submitted for necessary further action please.

Malik Naveed Tariq (ADL)Anti-Corruption Establishment,

Lahore Region Lahore.L/DDL


SUBJECT: REPORT/COMMENTS IN COMPLAINT NO. 848/2012, BY IQBAL HUSSAIN S/O MUSA R/O MODEL TOWN, LAHORE.




That the complainant has filed an application before your

good office and alleged that his properties situates at Kot Addu district

Muzaffar Garh, Jampur district Rajanpur, Kot Chutta District Dera Ghazi

Khan and concerned patwaris has prepared forged documents of above

mentioned properties. The complainant further alleged that he filed an

application before Anti-Corruption Department on 24th February 2012

but no material steps has been taken by the Anti-Corruption

Department.

It is pertinent to mention here that above allegations are

within the jurisdiction of Anti-Corruption Establishment, Dera Ghazi Khan

Region and complainant never filed any application before the office of

the respondent/Director Anti-Corruption Establishment, Lahore Region,

Lahore.


respectfully prayed that the complaint in hand may be filed to the

extent of Director Anti-Corruption Establishment, Lahore Region, Lahore

and report of the above complaint may be sought from Director Anti-

Corruption Establishment, Dera Ghazi Khan Region.

Malik Naveed Tariq (ADL) Representative


IN THE HONORABLE COURT OF MUHAMMAD IJAZ BUTT ADDITIONAL DISTRICT &

SESSIONS JUDGE LAHORE.

GHULAM MURTAZA

VS

DIRECTOR ANTI CORRUPTION ESTABLISHMENT LAHORE REGION LAHORE.


Brief facts are that one Ghulam Murtaza has leveled

allegations against Tehsildar Halqa Niaz Beg and others vide

complaint No. 12/2012 in the office of the respondent.

That according to Anti-Corruption Establishment Rules, 1985,

preliminary inquiry was conducted by Ch. Maqbool Ahmad

Assistant Director (Inv). Who after examining the record submitted

his final report and recommended to drop the said complaint on

08.03.2012, because the civil litigation is pending between the

parties.

That on the recommendations of the Investigating officer

competent authority/respondent has dropped the said complaint

on 21.03.2012.

Under the circumstances, it is respectfully prayed that

the petition in hand may kindly be dismissed.

Assistant Director (Legal)Anti Corruption Establishment,



Subject: REPORT IN `PETITION U/S 22-A & 22-B, FILED BY MIAN SARFRAZ JAWA ADVOCATE

Respected Sir,It is respectfully submitted that I have attended and submitted the

report/comments in the court of Mr. Abdul Sattar Langah Sb Learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, Lahore on 12-04-2012.

That Learned Additional District and Sessions Judge has directed as under:-

“In view of comments submitted by Assistant Director Legal, Anti-Corruption Establishment, Lahore, the respondents are directed to get record the verbatim statement of the petitioner and redress the grievance of the petitioner as per rules and law”(Attested copy of the orders is attached herewith)




IN THE HONORABLE COURT OF MUHAMMAD IJAZ BUTT ADDITIONAL DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE LAHORE.

NASIR MAQBOOL

VS



Brief facts of the case are that one Muhammad Tauqeer has

leveled allegation of corruption against Nasir Maqbool Qureshi etc.

That regular enquiry No. 98/2012 dated 09.02.2012 was

entrusted to Mr. Shah Rukh Khan Niazi Assistant Director Investigation.

That Investigating officer has recorded the version of both

the parties. The petitioner has joined the Inquiry and on last date of

hearing he requested for adjournment. That said enquiry is still pending

due to lack of interest of the petitioner.

That further action on the said enquiry may be taken as per

Anti-Corruption Establishment Rules, 1985.

Under the circumstances, it is respectfully prayed that the

petitioner may be directed to join the enquiry. So that the

matter be concluded as per law. In this circumstances petition

in hand may kindly be dismissed.



IN THE HONORABLE COURT OF ABDUL SATTAR LANGAH LEARNED ADDITIONAL DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE

LAHORE.

MIAN SARFRAZ AFTAB JAWA

VS



Brief facts of the case are that on the written complaint of

Mian Sarfraz Aftab Jawa Advocate, preliminary inquiry was conducted by

the competent authority.

That Mian Sarfraz Aftab Jawa Advocate has leveled

allegation of corruption against Serwar Si PS Mangamandi, Lahore. After

receiving complaint No. 997/12, preliminary enquiry was conducted by

Assistant Director Complaints, who vide its Letter No. ACE-LR-(C-

997)2012/5008 dated 22.03.2012, sought comments from CCPO,

Lahore. (Copy enclosed) The redressal of grievance of the petitioner is

under process and after receiving the report from CCPO, Lahore further

action will be taken as per Anti-Corruption Establishment Rules, 1985.


petition in hand may kindly be disposed of.




MUHAMMAD YASIN

VS



Brief facts of the case are that one Muhammad Yasin has

leveled allegation of corruption against ASI Mushtaq Ahmad etc PS

Baghbanpura, Lahore. After receiving complaint No. 126/12, preliminary

enquiry was conducted by Assistant Director Complaints, who vide its

letter No. ACE-LR-(C-126)2012/1283-1284 dated 24.01.2012 seeking

comments from CCPO, Lahore.

That after receiving the comments from CCPO Lahore

competent authority has converted the complaint in to regular inquiry

vide Inquiry No. 212/2012 on 27.03.2012 and the same was entrusted to

Mr. Shah Rukh Khan Niazi Assistant Director (Investigation).

The grievance of the petitioner has been redressed and

further action may be taken as per law.


petition in hand may kindly be dismissed.




Subject: REPORT IN FIR NO. 200/2009, OFFENCE U/S 420


report/comments in the court of Learned District and Sessions Judge, Lahore today i.e. 29-03-2012, in contempt petition titled Shahid Siddique VS Director ACE, Lahore.

That Learned District and Sessions Judge has directed to record the version of the petitioner and decide the matter as per law before 11.04.2012.

That detail report will be submitted on 11.04.2012 as per direction of Learned District and Sessions Judge, Lahore. Kindly direct the concerned officer to decide the matter as early as possible. So that the report be submitted on 11.04.2012 in the court.





MALIK MUHAMMAD SHAHBAZ

VS



Brief facts are that one Muhammad Shahbaz son of

Muhammad Hanif has leveled allegations against Mian Absar DSP

Circle Masti Gate and others vide complaint No. 559/2012 in the

office of the respondent.

That according to Anti-Corruption Establishment Rules, 1985,

preliminary inquiry is being conduct by the office of respondent

and in this regard comments were sought from CCPO, Lahore vide

Letter No. ACE-LR-(C-559)-2012/3032 & 3033 Dated 23-02-2012.

That the preliminary enquiry is entrusted to Mr. Shah Rukh

Khan Niazi Assistant Director (Inv) on 21-03-2012. Who has called

both the parties to record their version on 04-04-2012.

In view of above mentioned submissions it is most

respectfully prayed that the applicant may be directed to attend

the office of the Enquiry Officer on 04-04-2012. Under the

circumstances, it is respectfully prayed that the petition in hand

may kindly be dismissed.



|To,The Worthy Director,Anti-Corruption Establishment,Lahore Region, Lahore.

Subject: PROGRESS REPORT IN COMPLAINT NO. 1153/2012


report/comments in the court of Learned District and Sessions Judge, Lahore today i.e. 29-03-2012, in contempt petition titled Shahid Siddique VS Director ACE, Lahore.

That Learned District and Sessions Judge has directed to record the version of the petitioner and decide the matter as per law before 11.04.2012.

That detail report will be submitted on 11.04.2012 as per direction of Learned District and Sessions Judge, Lahore. Kindly direct the concerned officer to decide the matter as early as possible. So that the report be submitted on 11.04.2012 in the court.




DIRECTORATE OF ANTI-CORRUPTION ESTABLISHMENT

LAHORE REGION LAHORE.

To,The Haji Rana Fawad AhmadCircle Officer, Anti-Corruption Establishment,Lahore Region, Lahore.

No. ACE-DDL-2012/ Dated:

Subject: COMPLAINT NO. 357-1-12 FILED BY HAJI LIAQAT ALI R/O DISTRICT LAHORE- IN THE OFFICE OF OMBUDSMAN PUNJAB

I am directed to inform you by the office of the Learned Ombudsman Punjab as under:-

That one Haji Liaqat Ali S/O Hussain Khan filed a complaint No. 357/1/12, against you before Ombudsman Punjab leveling some allegations of faulty investigation.(Copy of application is attached)

That the complainant states that matter in case FIR No. 1916/2011, offence under section 420,468,471 PPC read with section 5/2/47 of PCA, Police Station Kahna, Lahore was under your investigation and you have not completed your investigation on merit.

That in this regards Memo No. DAC-DD(Legal-19)2012/2699 Dated 10.02.2012 was also received from Deputy Director Legal, Anti-Corruption Establishment, Punjab Lahore, wherein he has directed for submission of report& parawise comments in the said case. (Copy of Letter is attached)

That the complaint was lastly fixed for hearing on 26.03.2012 and the same was adjourned for 25-04-2012 You are therefore required to appear before Mr. Israr Ahmad Learned Consultant-IV, office of the Ombudsman Punjab, Lahore along with written reply/parawise comments without any delay.

(MALIK NAVEED TARIQ)Assistant Director (Legal),

Anti-Corruption Establishment,Lahore Region Lahore.

Copy for information:-1. P.A. to Director Anti-Corruption Establishment, Lahore

Region, Lahore.2. P.A. to Director General Anti-Corruption

Establishment, Punjab, Lahore.


LAHORE REGION LAHORE

To,

The Assistant Director (D),Anti-Corruption Establishment,Pubjab, Lahore.

No. ACE-LR-(E-598/11/L)-2012/

Dated:

Subject: COMMUNICATION OF ORDERS OF OMBUDSMAN PUNJAB TO THE AGENCY ABOUT NON-COMPLIANCE OF DIRECTION

Kindly refer to your office Endst. No. DAC-CR-ML-65-12/3409 dated

21.02.2012, on the subject cited above.

In compliance with the orders of Worthy Director General conveyed to

the undersigned through endorsement under reference the requisite report has

been submitted in the office of the Ombudsman Punjab, Lahore will be

submitted on 28.03.2012. Copy of report is enclosed herewith for your kind

information.

DEPUTY DIRESTOR (LEGAL)ANTI-CORRUPTION ESTABLISHMENT

LAHORE REGION LAHORE.



To,

The Assistant Director (D),Anti-Corruption Establishment,Pubjab, Lahore.

No. ACE-LR-(E-598/11/L)-2012/

Dated:

Subject: COMMUNICATION OF ORDERS OF OMBUDSMAN PUNJAB TO THE AGENCY ABOUT NON-COMPLIANCE OF DIRECTION

Kindly refer to your office Endst. No. DAC-CR-ML-65-12/3409 dated

21.02.2012, on the subject cited above.

In compliance with the orders of Worthy Director General conveyed to

the undersigned through endorsement under reference the requisite report has

been submitted in the office of the Ombudsman Punjab, Lahore on

28.03.2012. Copy of report submitted in the office of Ombudsman Punjab is

enclosed herewith for your kind information.

DEPUTY DIRESTOR (LEGAL)ANTI-CORRUPTION ESTABLISHMENT



MUHAMMAD IRSHAD

VS

DIRECTORE GENERAL ANT-CORRUPTION ESTABLISHMENT.

SUBJECT: REPORT/COMMENTS IN COMPLAINT NO. 706/2012




Brief facts of the complaint are that Enquiry NO. 197/2010,

against Muhammad Irshad EST Govt. Elementary School Maher Chand

Wala District Kasur was under probe in the office of Deputy Director,

ACE Kasur and Circle Officer Kasur was Enquiry Officer in the said

complaint.

That it is pertinent to mention here that the said Enquiry

Officer has recommended for dropping the said inquiry and the same is

still pending for final approval of the competent authority. It is further

submitted that allegations of harassment by the complainant are

baseless.


respectfully prayed that the complaint in hand may be filed.

Malik Naveed Tariq (ADL)Representative



BAGH ALI BHATTI

VS

DIRECTORE ACE, LAHORE REGION LAHORE




had already been submitted in complaint No. 4776/2010, which was on

the same subject matter.

Brief facts of the case are that FIR NO. 02/2011 at Police

Station ACE Lahore was lodged on the complaint of Bagh Ali Bhatti. After

lodging the FIR the matter was investigated by the circle officer Head

Quarter, Lahore and the investigating officer after investigation declare

the accused persons innocent and discharged the accused persons.

That the investigating officer has submitted the discharge

report under section 173 CR.PC in the competent court vide Road

Certificate No. 55/21, dated 16.01.2012.


respectfully prayed that the complaint in hand has become infectious

and the complainant may be directed to approach the concerned court

and the complaint in hand may be filed to the extent of Director Anti-

Corruption Establishment, Lahore Region, Lahore.



BEFORE MR. ISRAR AHMED LEARNED CONSULTANT (IV) OFFICE OF THE

OMBUDSMAN PUNJAB LAHORE.

BAGH ALI BHATTI

VS




Kindly refer to subject cited above report/comments are

given as under.

Brief facts of the case are that FIR NO. 02/2011 at Police

Station ACE Lahore was lodged on the complaint of Bagh Ali Bhatti. After

lodging the FIR the matter was investigated by the circle officer Head

Quarter, Lahore and the investigating officer after investigation declare

the accused persons innocent and discharged the accused persons.

That the investigating officer has submitted the discharge

report under section 173 CR.PC in the competent court vide Road

Certificate No. 55/21, dated 16.01.2012.


respectfully prayed that the complaint in hand has become infectious

and the complainant may be directed to approach the concerned court

and the complaint in hand may be filed to the extent of Director Anti-

Corruption Establishment, Lahore Region, Lahore.




TANVEER MAHMOOD

VS





given as under.

Brief facts of the case are that one Tanveer Mahmood has

filed a complaint No. 3419/2011. He submitted in his complaint that he

has submitted an application before respondent vide Enquiry No.

42/2011, but the respondent No. 1, is not interested to proceed further.

That after perusal of the record it reveals that the said

Enquiry is relating to somew one else and is not related to the

complainant Tanveer Mahmood.



extent of Director Anti-Corruption Establishment, Lahore Region, Lahore.





NAZAR ELAHI

VS


SUBJECT: REPORT/COMMENTS IN COMPLAINT NO. 1988/6/11



given as under.

Brief facts are that one Nazar Elahi has leveled allegation of

corruption against Akhtar Hussain Stenographer vide written complaint

No. 159/2011. After receiving complaint No. 159/11, preliminary enquiry

was conducted and the said complaint was converted into regular

inquiry vide Enquiry No. 31/2011 and the same was entrusted to Deputy

Director (Investigation), Anti-Corruption Establishment, Okara.

That after probing the matter on full length and hearing

both the parties Deputy Director (Inv), Anti-Corruption Establishment,

Okara has recommended for dropping the said enquiry and the

competent authority dropped the same on 27.02.2012, vide letter No.

ACE-LR-(E-31/11/OK)-2012/323

That allegations of corruption was not proved by the

complainant Nazar Elahi, against the respondent Akhtar Hussain








RANA ANWAR HUSSAIN

VS

RANA IRSLAN KHAN




given as under.

That complainant has leveled some personal allegations

against the then Circle Officer Rana Irslan Khan who is repatriated to his

parent department and the said complaint was filed after the

repatriation of the said delinquent official. That said delinquent is

now serving in Motorway Police, he can explain the allegations himself

and office of the Director Anti-Corruption Establishment, Lahore Region,

Lahore has no concern with the said delinquent official.






IN THE HONORABLE COURT OF MUHAMMAD IJAZ BUTT ADDITIONAL

DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE LAHORE.

HIDAYAT BIBI

VS



Brief facts of the case are that one Mst. Hadayat Bibi has leveled

allegation of corruption against 1) Muhammad Jahngir 2) Muhammad

Saleem, Secretary Union Council Sultan Mahmood No. 38, Lahore

3) Administrator Union Council Sultan Mahmood No. 38, Lahore. After

receiving complaint No. 3887/11, preliminary enquiry was conducted

and prima facie allegations of corruptions were made out. That

competent authority/respondent has approved regular enquiry against

above mentioned accused persons and complaint No. 3887/11 was

converted into regular enquiry vide enquiry No. 45/2012 dated

21.01.2012 and the same was entrusted to Mr. Shah Rukh Khan Niazai

Assistant Director (Inv) on 21.01.2012. The investigating officer has

issued notice both the parties for 10.03.2012. The petitioner alongwith

her witnesses may join the investigation for recording her statement

and matter will be decided after hearing both the parties on merit.


contempt petition in hand may kindly be dismissed.




ALLAH DITTA

VS



Brief facts of the case are that one Allah Ditta has filed a

petition under section 22-A & 22-B for compliance of order of this

Honorable Court Dated 04.10.2011. He further submitted that he has

submitted an application alongwith order of this Honorable Court vide

Diary No. 5264/2011, Dated 28.11.2011 but the respondent No. 1, is not

interested to proceed further.

After perusal of the record it reveals that an application

submitted by petitioner was already decided vide enquiry No. 237/2011.

The said enquiry was decided by Assistant Director (Investigation) and

the same was dropped vide letter NO.

ACE-LR-(E-237/2011/L)2011/11318 dated 03.11.2011.






MUHAMMAD YASIN

VS



Brief facts of the case are that one Muhammad Yasin has

leveled allegation of corruption against ASI Mushtaq Ahmad etc PS

Baghbanpura, Lahore. After receiving complaint No. 126/12, preliminary


letter No. ACE-LR-(C-126)2012/1283-1284 dated 24.01.2012 seeking

comments from CCPO, Lahore. The redressal of grievance of the

petitioner is under process and after receiving the report from CCPO,

Lahore further action may be taken as per law.






MUHAMMAD ISHAQ

VS



Brief facts of the case are that one Muhammad Ishaq has

leveled allegation of corruption against SI Muhammad Younis PS Garhi

Shahu Lahore etc. After receiving complaint No. 3833/11, preliminary


letter No. ACE-LR-(C-3833) 2011/13136 dated 24.12.2011 seeking

comments from CCPO, Lahore. The redressal of grievance of the

petitioner is under process and after receiving the report from CCPO,

Lahore further action may be taken as per law.





Subject: REPORT IN COMPLAINT OF ZUBAIDA KHANUM VERSUS DIRECTOR, ANTI CORRUPTION ESTABLISHMETN, LAHORE BRFORE ISRAR AHMAD KHAN CONSULTANT-IV OFFICE OF OMBUDSMAN LAHORE.

Kindly refer to subject cited above, it is humbly submitted

that above mentioned complaint was fixed for hearing on 22.02.2012, in

which next date of hearing is 10.03.2012. That Honorable Consultant

has adjourned the said complaint for 10.03.2012 with the direction to

conclude the matter till next date of hearing.

Submitted for further necessary action please.

MALIK NAVEED TARIQ (ADL-V)Anti Corruption Establishment,


W/DDL


KAMRAN AFZAL

VS



Brief facts of the case are that one Kamran Afzal has leveled

allegation of corruption against SI Asghar Ali PS Shahdra Town, Lahore.

After receiving complaint No. 4031/11, preliminary enquiry was

conducted by the Deputy Director (Inv-I), both the parties were

summoned for 03.01.12. Despite of calling again and again the

complainant Kamran Afzal could not appear before the Deputy Director

Investigation. The respondent Asghar Ali SI stated that the complainant

conducts the gambling at club and he as per law registered FIR No.

1259/11 and recovery was also affected from him. He further states that

the complainant is blackmailing just to avoid the further proceedings.

The allegation of corruption against Asghar Ali SI was not proved in the

said preliminary enquiry.

That allegation of corruption was not proved against the

respondent SI Asghar Ali competent authority dropped the complaint on

06.01.2012.






MUHAMMAD ARIF

VS



Brief facts of the case are that one Muhammad

Arif has leveled allegation of corruption against Asif Ali Patwari Halqa

Manga Mandi Lahore. After receiving complaint No. 2055/11, preliminary

enquiry was conducted by Deputy Director (Inv-III) Anti Corruption

Establishment, Lahore Region, Lahore. Respondent Asif Ali Patwari

denied the allegations regarding receipt of illegal gratification of Rs.

5000/- for issuance of Fard. He stated that the land is still in the name of

Sardar Bibi (Mother of the complainant and inheritance mutation of the

mother of the complainant has not yet been sanctioned. He further

stated that he advised the complainant that inheritance mutation may

be sanctioned from competent authority before issuance of Fard and the

complainant get angry and he filed this application malafidely. Prima

facie allegations of taking illegal gratification could not be established,

even then competent authority has referred the matter in question to

the Assistant Commissioner for enquiry and necessary action as per law,

vide letter No. ACE-LR-(C-2055) 2011/10033 dated 05.10.2011. The

petitioner may approach to the Assistant Commissioner.






MUNAWAR KHAN

VS



Brief facts of the case are that one Munawar Khan has

leveled allegation of corruption against SI Muhammad Yasin PS Civil

Line, Lahore. After receiving complaint No. 3396/11, preliminary enquiry

was conducted and letter No. ACE-LR-(C-3396) 2011/11582 dated

15.11.2011 and Letter No. ACE-LR-(C-3396) 2011/11962 dated

24.11.2011 was sent to CCPO Lahore for enquiry report which was

received vide Diary No. 1659/MISC/CC/CCPO Dated 16.12.2011 in which

inquiry officer stated that ……………“business relation has been

existed between complainant and Mian Autos. During

Investigation complainant has withdraw his application and

denied any claim against SI Muhammad Yasin”……, and allegation

of corruption against Muhammad Yasin SI was not proved in the said

enquiry conducted by Superintendent of Police Investigation Civil Line

Division, Lahore.

That being non-disclosure of allegations and allegations of

corruption was not proved by the complainant Munawar Khan against

the respondent SI Muhammad Yasin competent authority dropped the

complaint on 06.01.2012.




Lahore Region, Lahore


MIAN QAISAR AZIZ

VS



Brief facts of the case are that one Mian Qaisar Aziz has

leveled allegation of corruption against SI Waseem PS Lower Mall,

Lahore. After receiving complaint No. 3239/11, preliminary enquiry was

conducted and letter No. ACE-LR-(C-3239) 2011/13070 dated

24.12.2011 was sent to CCPO Lahore for enquiry which was received

vide Diary No. 178/MISC/CC/CCPO Dated 28.01.2011 and allegation

against Waseem SI proved in the said enquiry conducted by

Superintendent of Police Investigation Iqbal Town Division, Lahore. That

respondent approved regular enquiry against Waeem SI vide regular

enquiry No. 113/2012 dated 13.02.2012 and the same was entrusted to

Mr. Riaz Ahmad Ch. Assistant Director (Inv) on 21.02.2012. The

investigating officer has issued notice both the parties for 10.03.2012.

The petitioner may approach to the investigating officer for recording

his statement and matter will be decided after hearing both the parties

on merit.





BEFORE MUZAFFAR MEHMOOD GOVERNMENT OF THE PUNJAB SECRETARY AUQAF & RELIGIOUS AFFAIRS DEPARTMETN

Subject: NOTE FOR PERSONAL HEARING IN THE PREPRESENTATION FILED BY DIRECTOR, ANTI CORRUPTION ESTABLISHMETN, LAHORE AGAINST THE OMBUDSMAN’S ORDER DATED 10.08.2011

Kindly refer to notice No. PS/Secy A&RA/1-9/2012 dated

16.01.2012 issued by your good self on the subject noted above.

Facts in brief are that case FIR No. 183/2004 was registered

against the complainant/accused namely Ch. Muhammad Naeem,

Electrical Supervisor, TMA Ravi Town, Lahore alongwith other co

accused persons at PS ACE, Lahore Region after approval of competent

authority and incomplete challan against him was submitted in the court

of Learned Senior Special Judge, Anti Corruption, Lahore on 02.03.2005.

On 13.04.2005 complainant/accused joined investigation after obtaining

interim bail and produced receipts Nos 1977 dated 24.02.2005 and

1978 dated 25.02.2005 amounting to Rs. 440000/= (3,00000+1,40000)

deposited by him in the Government Treasury showing the embezzled

amount due against him to the I.O with his free consent which were

taken into possession by the I.O in presence of witnesses through

recovery memo dated 13.04.2005 placed at page 317-C. On

19.04.2005 interim bail of complainant/accused was cancelled by

the Learned Senior Special Judge, Anti Corruption, Lahore as

withdrawn and his arrest was effected by the I.O through Zimni

No. 81 para NO. 1 dated 19.04.2005. The Learned Senior Special

Judge Anti Corruption Lahore vide order dated 20.04.2005 sent the

complainant/accused namely Muhammad Naeem Electrical

Supervisor, TMA Ravi Town, Lahore to judicial lockup and the case

is subjudic in the court of law.

I have examined the case on legal as well as factual

aspects and found that on prima facie proving the allegations case

FIR No. 183/2004 PS ACE, Lahore was registered against the

complainant/accused after approval of competent authority.

During investigation sufficient incriminating material to connect

the accused with the embezzlement was collected by the I.O and

the recovery of Rs. 440000/- was effected from him which was

produced by him through his free will specifically when he was on

interim bail at the time of recovery so there is no element of

coercion or maladministration on the part of I.O at the time of

recovery as alleged in the complaint.

Since the matter is subjudice in the court of competent

jurisdiction, the jurisdiction of Learned Ombudsman Punjab is

barred to entertain the complaint U/S 9 (1)(a) of “The Punjab

Office of the Ombudsman Act,1997” which is as under:-

“Jurisdiction, functions and powers of the

Ombudsman: - (i) The Ombudsman may on a

complaint by any aggrieved person, on a

reference by the Government or the Provincial

Assembly, or on a motion of the Supreme

Court or the High Court made during the

course of any proceedings before it or of his

own motion, undertake any investigation into

any allegation of maladministration on the

part of any Agency or any of its officers or

employees.

Provided that the Ombudsman shall not have

any jurisdiction to investigate or enquiry into

any matter which:-

(a) are subjudice before a court of competent

jurisdiction on

the date of the receipt of a complaint,

reference or motion by him”.

In view of above, it is a fit case for filing of

Representation to the Governor, Punjab Lahore U/S 32 of the

Punjab Office of the Ombudsman Act,1997. Matter may therefore,

be entrusted to the Learned DD(P), ACE, Lahore Region for futher

proceedings but after bringing the matter into knowledge of the

Worthy DG ACE, Punjab Lahore as a copy of impugned order dated

10.08.2011 has also been sent to him.

Last date of limitation for filing OF

Representation to the Governor, Punjab, Lahore

against order dated 10.08.2011 passed by the

Learned Ombudsman Punjab, Lahore is going to

09.09.2011.

Submitted for appropriate orders please.

MUNIR SHAHIDRepresentative



HAJI ABDUL REHMAN

VS



Brief facts of the case are that one Abdul Rehman has

leveled allegation of corruption against SI Ghulam Abbas PS Muslim

Town, Lahore. After receiving complaint No. 3151/11, preliminary

enquiry was conducted and letter No. 11205 dated 01.11.2011 was sent

to CCPO Lahore for enquiry which was received on 24.12.2011 and

allegation against Ghulam Abbas SI proved in the said enquiry

conducted by Superintendent of Police Investigation Iqbal Town, Lahore.

That respondent approved regular enquiry against Ghulam Abbas SI

vide regular enquiry No. 69/2012 dated 28.01.2012 and the same was

entrusted to Mr. Shah Rukh Khan Niazi Assistant Director (Inv) on

07.02.2012. The investigating officer has issued notice for 16.02.2012.

The petitioner may approach to the investigating officer for recording

his statement and matter will be decided after hearing both the parties

on merit.





ANTI CORRUPTION ESTABLISHMENTLAHORE REGION LAHORE

To

The Deputy Director (Legal),Directorate of Anti Corruption Establishment,Punjab, Lahore.

No.ACE-LR-2012/ Dated:-

Subject: SUBMISSION OF REPORT REGARDING COMPLAINT NO. 738-OPK-11 & 1830-OPK-11 IN THE COURT OF MUHAMMAD IJAZ BUTT ADDITIONAL DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE LAHORE.

Respected Sir,

It is submitted that petition u/s 22-A & 22-B filed by

Mst. Horran Bibi W/o Nazar Khan is pending before Mr. Muhammad

Ijaz Butt Addition District & Sessions Judge Lahore in which next

date of hearing is fixed on 10.02.2012. Final report regarding

complaint No. 738-OPK-11 & 1830-OPK-11 is required by the

verbal order of the Court.

Kindly depute any officer to submit the same in the

court and oblige.

Submitted please.

MALIK NAVEED TARIQAssistant Director (Legal)

Anti Corruption EstablishmentLahore Region Lahore

IN THE COURT OF MUHAMMAD IJAZ BUTT ADDITIONAL DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE LAHORE.

SHAMS-UD-DIN

VS

DIRECTOR ANTI CORRUPTION LAHORE ETC.


BRIEF FACTS

Brief facts of the complaint are that complainant Shams-ud-

Din as alleged that Zulafiqar Patwari has received Rs. 30000/- from him

as illegal gratification to record the stay order proceedings in Revenue

Register and after getting the bribe he entered the stay order Vide Rapt

No. 4 dated 04.09.2005 in Roznamcha. On his complaint enquiry was

initiated against the said Patwari who appeared in person before

enquiry officer and has denied the allegations leveled on him. After

probing the matter final report was submitted by Rao Pervaiz Akhtar the

then Assistant Director (Inv) on 19.12.2011.

Legal branch after examining the final report and file on

05.01.2012 raised some legal objections and recommended that after

re-enquiring the matter revised final report be submitted. Competent

authority passed order on 11.01.2012 for compliance of objections

raised by legal branch and file entrusted to Mr. Riaz Ahmed Assistant

Director (Inv) on 13.01.2012, who is probing the matter and the same

will be finalized soon.


contempt application being based on false facts and information be

kindly be dismissed.




SHEIKH KHALID SAEED

VS

DIRECTOR ANTI CORRUPTION LAHORE REGION LAHORE ETC.

REPORT IN PETITION UNDER SECTION 22-A & 22-B OF CR PC SUBMITTED BY MALIK NAVEED TARIQ ASSISTANT DIRECTOR (LEGAL) ANTI CORRUPTION ESTABLISHMENT LAHORE REGION LAHORE.


That complainant submitted an application to Chief

Minister Punjab which was entrusted to respondent No. 1 by PSO

to Chief Minister Punjab. Wherein the applicant requested to probe

the matter and take legal action against the accused persons. The

complainant Sh. Khalid Saeed R/o 85-The Mall, Imtiaz Plaza vide

property No. 85/108-R19-S has alleged that M/S Imran Ashraf

Revenue Officer, Abdul Khaliq Qanongo, Irfan Ali Patwari Mouza

Mozang Lahore. He further stated that Record Keeper Data Gunj

Bakhsh Town, Lahore have made forged and bogus mutation and

changed the Khasra No. 2113 & 2114 of his property measuring 6

Marla 24 Sqft, in-connivance with his opponent party and revenue

functionaries in-connivance with the beneficiaries issued Fard for

sale of property in Khasra No. 2113 through Rapt Roznamcha 831

dated 11.08.2010 by fabricating Fard Badar No. 285 dated

29.07.2010.

On the written complaint the matter was probed by the

enquiry officer S.D. Khalid Deputy Director (Inv) Anti Corruption

Establishment, Lahore Region, Lahore vide enquiry No. 167/2011

who after hearing both the parties submitted his final report on

16.07.2011. Enquiry officer has recommended that the matter

pertains to demarcation of property and parties have already

invoked the jurisdiction of Civil Court, no criminal misconducts on

the part of any public servant regarding preparation of Fard Badar

could be substantiated during enquiry and the matter was referred

to the Additional Collector, District Lahore for further necessary

action as to the allegations regarding demarcation of property etc.

In this regard letter No. ACE-LR-(E-167/11/L)-2011/8397 dated

10.09.2011 was sent to the Additional Collector, District Lahore

wherein it is referred that:-

“After due process, the Competent Authority

have approved that the matter may be referred

to your good office at your own end as to the

allegations regarding demarcation of property

etc. under intimation to this office”.

PRAYER:

Under the circumstances, petition being without any

lawful cause of action, is prayed to be disposed of.



BEFORE MR.ISRAR AHMED THE LEARNED CONSULTANT (IV) OFFICE OF THE OMBUDSMAN PUNJAB LAHORE.

REPORT IN COMPLAINT NO. 2016/11 SUBMITTED BY CH. MUHAMMAD NAEEM.


Kindly refer to notice No. 2016-11 dated 14.11.2011on the

subject noted above.

It is submitted that case FIR No. 183/04 was registered

against the complainant/accused namely Ch. Muhammad Naeem,

Electrical Supervisor, TMA Ravi town, Lahore alongwith other co-accused

persons at PS ACE, Lahore Region after approval of competent authority

and incomplete challan against him was submitted in the court of

Learned Senior Special Judge, Anti Corruption, Lahore on 02.03.2005.

On 13.04.2005 complainant/accused joined investigation after obtaining

interim bail and produced receipts Nos. 1977 dated 24.02.2005 and

1978 dated 25.02.2005 amounting to Rs. 440000/-(300000+140000)

deposited by him in the Government Treasury showing the embezzled

amount due against him to the I.O with his free consent which were

taken into possession by the I.O in presence of witnesses through

recovery memo dated 13.04.2005. On 19.04.2005 interim bail of

complainant/accused was cancelled by the Learned Senior Special

Judge, Anti Corruption, Lahore as withdrawn and his arrest was effected

by the I.O through Zimni No. 81 para No. 01 dated 19.04.2005. The

Learned Senior Special Judge Anti Corruption, Lahore vide order dated

20.04.2005 sent the complainant/accused namely Muhammad Naeem

Electrical Supervisor, TMA Ravi, Lahore to judicial lockup and the case is

subjudice in the court of law.

The order dated 10.08.2011 passed by your good self as to

the exclusion of the name of complainant namely Ch. Muhammad

Naeem from the subject enquiry has been challenged thorough

representation/appeal before the Honorable Governor Province of

Punjab, Lahore which is pending for adjudication.

MUNIR SHAHIDRepresentative


SHAMS-UD-DIN

VS

DIRECTOR ANTI CORRUPTION LAHORE ETC.

PARAWISE REPLY ON BEHALF OF RESPONDENT NO. 01


1. That the contents of para No. 01 are admitted to extent that

the petition was filed by the petitioner and the Honorable

Court was pleased to pass an order dated 20.09.2011.

2. That the contents of para No. 2 are correct to extent that in

compliance of court order dated 20.09.2011, Enquiry

bearing No. 555/2011 initiated in the Anti Corruption

Establishment, Lahore Region, Lahore and on 06.10.2011

the petitioner and defendant No. 02 put their attendance on

the order sheet.

3. That the contents of para 03 are totally false and frivolous

as it is mentioned in para No. 02 that enquiry bearing No.

555/2011 has already been initiated against respondent No.

02 who has dully made his appearance on 06.10.2011. Copy

of order sheet is annexed for kind perusal of this Honorable

Court which is reflective of the fact that the respondent No.

02 has marked his attendance.

4. That the contents of para No. 04 are vehemently denied

being false.

5. That the role of respondent No. 02 whether he has

committed forgery by entering wrong mutation or not shall

be determined during the course of enquiry.

6. That the contents of para No. 06 are fabricated as

respondent No. 02 appeared in the enquiry firstly on

06.10.2011, 26.10.2011, 19.11.2011, 21.11.2011 and lastly

on 28.11.2011.

7. Legal.


contempt application being based on false facts and information be

kindly be dismissed.

Deputy Director (Inv-III)On behalf of respondent (No. 01)Anti Corruption Establishment,


BEFORE MR. ISRAR AHMAD THE LEARNED CONSULTANT OFFICE OF THE OMBUDSMAN PUNJAB, LAHORE .

REPORT IN COMPLAINT NO. 2988/2011 SUBMITTED BY MALIK MUHAMMAD SAQIB ANJUM .

Respectfully Sheweth

I have honor to refer to your notice No. 2988/2011 dated

29.10.2011 on the subject noted above.

The above titled complaint does not pertain to Anti

Corruption Establishment, Lahore Region rather the same relates to

District Narowal which falls within jurisdiction of Anti Corruption

Establishment, Gujranwala Region, Gujranwala.

It is therefore, requested that further correspondence in the

matter may be made with the concerned office.

Deputy Director (Legal)Anti Corruption Establishment,


No.ACE-LR-2011/ Dated:-

A Copy is forwarded to the Director (Legal), Anti Corruption

Establishment, Punjab, Lahore for information with reference to his

memo No. DG-ACE-DIR-L-(79)-2011/17865 dated 12.11.2011.

Deputy Director (Legal)Anti Corruption Establishment,


IN THE COURT OF SPECIAL JUDGE ANIT CORRUPTION LAHORE .

In Re: - Anwaar Hussain Vs The State

CASE FIR NO. 55/2008 PS, DACE, LAHORE.

Subject: APPLICATION FOR GRANTING TIME FOR SUBMISSION OF CHALLAN U/S 173 CR PC.


1. That the above titled petition is pending adjudication before

this Honorable Court and is fixed for submission of report u/s

173 Cr PC for today.

2. That the investigation of case FIR No.55/2008 has been

entrusted to investigating team comprising of undersigned

Anti Corruption Establishment, Lahore Region, Lahore by the

competent authority vide order dated 19.10.2011.

3. That the case is complicated and in order to conclude the

investigation evidence is required to be collected as

allegedly huge loss to Government exchequer is involved.

4. That interest of justice demand that the investigation be

based on proper evidence and for this purpose appropriate

time is required.

In view of above circumstances, it is very humbly prayed that

further appropriate time may be granted for finalization of investigation

and submission of report u/s 173 Cr PC in the best interest of justice.

Deputy Director (Inv-I),Anti Corruption Establishment,


Deputy Director (Legal),Anti Corruption Establishment,



In Re: - Muhammad Shahbaz Vs The Additional Director Anti Corruption Lahore Petition u/s 22A, 22B Cr PC

Report on behalf of respondent


The facts in brief are that the petitioner submitted a

complaint against Amanat Ullah ASI PS Shahdara Lahore under the

allegation voiced in the petition. On the receipt of the complaint the

matter has been referred to the CCPO for obtaining his comments and

report alongwith the counter version of the ASI. On the receipt of the

comments/report and counter version of the ASI, further proceedings

will be conducted in accordance with law and rules. The petitioner is

premature and is liable to be dismissed.

RepresentativeZulafqar Ali (ASI)

Anti Corruption Establishment,Lahore Region, Lahore

IN THE COURT OF SPECIAL JUDGE ANIT CORRUPTION LAHORE .

In Re: - Anwaar Hussain Vs The State

CASE FIR NO. 55/2008 PS, DACE, LAHORE.

Subject: APPLICATION FOR GRANTING TIME FOR SUBMISSION OF CHALLAN U/S 173 CR PC.


5. That the above titled petition is pending adjudication before

this Honorable Court and is fixed for submission of report u/s

173 Cr PC for today.

6. That the investigation of case FIR No.55/2008 has been

entrusted to investigating team comprising of undersigned

Anti Corruption Establishment, Lahore Region, Lahore by the

competent authority vide order dated 19.10.2011.

7. That the case is complicated and in order to conclude the

investigation evidence is required to be collected as

allegedly huge loss to Government exchequer is involved.

8. That interest of justice demand that the investigation be

based on proper evidence and for this purpose appropriate

time is required.

In view of above circumstances, it is very humbly prayed that

further appropriate time may be granted for finalization of investigation

and submission of report u/s 173 Cr PC in the best interest of justice.

Deputy Director (Legal), Deputy Director (Inv-I),Anti Corruption Establishment, Anti Corruption Establishment, Lahore Region, Lahore Lahore Region, Lahore


In Re:- Muhammad Alyas Vs Deputy Director Anti Corruption Lahore Petition u/s 22A, 22B Cr PC

Report on behalf of respondent


The contention of the petitioner contained in para 2 of the

petition is not correct because the application/complaint annexed with

the petition has never been received in ACE.

It is therefore, requested that the petitioner may be directed

to attend the ACE alongwith the complaint supported by an affidavit for

further action by the ACE in accordance with ACE Rules 1985.


Anti Corruption Establishment, Lahore Region, Lahore


Maqsood Ahmed

VS

DIRECTOR GENERAL ANTI CORRUPTION LAHORE ETC .


Brief facts of the complaint filed by Maqsood Ahmed against

Muhammad Yousaf Khokhar etc are that the father of the complainant

Muhammad Jahangir was owner of property No. NE-XVI-153-S-15/1/RH,

who has died and now the property is in possession of his legal heirs.

Malik Muhammad Ijaz by giving heavy bribe to excise inspector

Muhammad Yousaf Khokhar got prepared a forged PT-1 S-No.5307/1

dated: 01-01-2006 in his name. The complainant requested that the

same may be cancelled.

On receipt of this complaint the same was marked as complaint

No.1744/2011 in the Anti Corruption Establishment, Lahore Region,

Lahore. After due process and probe the competent authority vide his

order that dated: 02-06-2011 directed to refer the same to the

department and incompliance of that order the instant complaint was

referred to Director General Excise and Taxation vide this office

Memo,No.ACE-LR(C-1744)/2011-4768 dated 10-06-2011 for disposal at

their end.

The complaint has been referred to Excise Department on

02.06.2011 where as the order of this Honourable court was passed on

03-06-2011. In view of the above mentioned circumstances now the

complaint is lying with Director General Excise and Taxation for its

adjudication.

It is humbly prayed that petition in hand may kindly be dismissed.




ABDUL AZIZ

VS

DIRECTOR ANTI CORRUPTION LAHORE.


With profound respect it is humbly submitted that due to the

non receipt of the copy of petition u/s 22A, 22B Cr PC, the

report/comments have not been submitted in this Honorable Court.

It is therefore, requested that the copy of the petition may

kindly be ordered to be supplied so that the comments/report could be

submitted.




MUHAMMMAD MAJEED

VS

DIRECTOR ANTI CORRUPTION LAHORE.


With profound respect it is humbly submitted that due to the

non receipt of the copy of petition u/s 22A, 22B Cr PC, the

report/comments have not been submitted in this Honorable Court.

It is therefore, requested that the copy of the petition may

kindly be ordered to be supplied so that the comments/report could be

submitted.



To

The Worthy DirectorAnti Corruption Establishment,Lahore Region, Lahore.

Subject: C ASUAL LEAVE

Respected Sir,

With due respect and profound regards it is submitted

that I have to go to Layyah to look after my father. So, I can not

attend the office on 09.04.2012 to 10.04.2012. Kindly grant me

two days casual leave with permission to leave the station.

I shall be highly thankful to you.

MALIK NAVEED TARIQ Assistant Director (Legal)

Anti Corruption Establishment,Lahore Region, Lahore

L/DDL:-

naveed tariq

Education