KARACHI: A special court judge has returned a customs investigation report in a high-value warehouse fraud case, ruling that the “Final Challan” contains fatal legal defects, tainted investigative practices and evidence of mala fide conduct, and ordering a fresh, comprehensive investigation within 14 days.
Special Judge (Customs, Taxation & Anti-Smuggling-I) Obaid Ahmed Khan issued the order in open court, directing Investigating Officer Preventive Officer Muhammad Ahsan Mushtaq to conduct an “honest and impartial” further investigation under Section 173 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898.
The case stems from an FIR registered Sept. 2, 2026, on the complaint of Preventive Officer Imran Maqsood. Prosecutors allege that a confiscated consignment of electronic merchandise — Auction Lot No. ASO-101/2025-HQ, with an assessed value of Rs. 12,673,158 and a market value of Rs. 18,203,257 — was fraudulently removed from State Warehouse-I at Custom House, Karachi.
The removal allegedly relied on forged documents, including a fabricated certificate under Rule 72 of the Customs Rules, 2001; a bogus Delivery Order No. 004004; an unverified CPR-IT for Rs. 1,500,000; and an uncredited PSID reflecting an undeposited bid amount of Rs. 15,000,000. The original auction file also disappeared from the Auction Section, causing a total revenue loss to the public exchequer.
In his order, the judge identified a “central irregularity” in the treatment of four customs officials cited as prosecution witnesses: SPS Aftab Kalhoro and Preventive Officers Mehwish Khan, Maryam Mukhtar and Sumbal Imran. PO Mehwish scrutinized the papers and issued the gate pass, while PO Maryam released the consignment from the warehouse, according to the order.
The investigating officer exonerated both officers, asserting they acted in “good faith and bonafide discharge of their official duties” under “hierarchical reliance.” But the judge noted the IO conceded that a formal departmental inquiry is underway against PO Mehwish, PO Maryam, SPS Aftab and others over the fraudulent release — a contradiction the court said compromises the prosecution’s case.
The order also said accused Shahzad Aslam alleged illegal monetary distributions to officers, specifically naming PO Sumbal Imran in connection with a Rs. 2.5 million payment through Zain Ullah Shah. The IO dismissed the allegations as false without an independent probe or summoning banking records, and cited PO Sumbal as a prosecution witness.
The court further noted that no stolen merchandise — hundreds of branded electronic devices including tablets, AirPods Pro, Marshall and JBL speakers and Meta Quest sets — has been recovered, despite the arrest and physical remand of bidder Talha Hafeez, who operates a retail shop at Star Plaza, Saddar. No search was conducted for recovery, and no effort was made to trace or freeze the Rs. 15 million in cash allegedly delivered to co-accused Tehseen’s residence, the order said.
The judge also criticized the IO for submitting an incomplete report under the title “Final Challan” while admitting in paragraph 18 that “the investigation has not been exhausted” and that a supplementary report would follow.
On digital evidence, the court said the prosecution relies heavily on WhatsApp screenshots and voice notes, yet accused Shahzad Aslam never surrendered his mobile phone. The IO did not seize recipient phones under formal recovery memos, obtain forensic extraction certificates, secure CDR or subscriber certificates, or record hash values, disregarding standards under Article 164 of the Qanun-e-Shahadat Order, 1984, the order said. The accountant who purportedly filmed the cash transfer was neither charged nor cited as a witness.
The judge also noted that private typist Qazi Saif-ud-din, who allegedly facilitated the gate pass for Rs. 15,000, was omitted from all columns of the report, and that allegations and annexures concerning separate vehicle auctions (ASO-157/2024 and ASO-97/2024) were improperly blended into the case without separate FIRs.
The court directed the IO to re-evaluate the legal status of the four officials in light of the departmental inquiries and determine whether their failures constitute criminal negligence or complicity under Section 156(1) clause 82 of the Customs Act, 1969. It also ordered proper search and recovery proceedings, tracing of the cash trail, submission of digital hardware to an authorized government forensic laboratory, and resolution of the status of the typist and the accountant.
The judge warned the IO that an investigator is “an officer of the law whose sole duty is to dig out truth and justice” and must act without favor toward departmental colleagues or fear of senior hierarchy. The court said it would not hesitate to initiate legal proceedings against him — including departmental action, criminal proceedings for fabricating false evidence and screening off offenders under the Pakistan Penal Code, and action under the Customs Act — should he persist in biased or mala fide investigative practices.
Copies of the order were dispatched to the DG Customs Islamabad, the Collector of Customs Enforcement Karachi and the Special Public Prosecutor for immediate notice and compliance. A copy of the returned “Final Challan” is to be kept on record.
