KARACHI: A Karachi customs court has rejected the final investigative report in a case over the alleged fraudulent removal of confiscated electronics from a state warehouse. It cited the selective treatment of customs officials, the failure to recover any goods and the investigator’s own admission that the probe was unfinished.
Special Judge Obaid Ahmed Khan of the Special Court for Customs, Taxation and Anti-Smuggling-I returned the report to the investigating officer, Preventive Officer Muhammad Ahsan Mushtaq. He ordered a “comprehensive, honest and impartial” further investigation and gave Mushtaq 14 days to file a new final report.
The case, The State versus Muhammad Shahzad Aslam and others, stems from a Sept. 2 complaint by Preventive Officer Imran Maqsood, registered at the Collectorate of Customs Enforcement at N.M.B. Wharf. Prosecutors allege a consignment of electronic goods, designated Auction Lot No. ASO-101/2025-HQ, was removed from State Warehouse-I at Custom House. The lot was assessed at about 12.7 million rupees and had a market value of about 18.2 million rupees, according to the order.
Prosecutors say the removal relied on forged or unverified documents: a fabricated certificate under Rule 72 of the Customs Rules, a bogus delivery order, an unverified income tax payment record for 1.5 million rupees, and a payment identification number showing a bid of 15 million rupees that was never deposited. The original file for the lot also disappeared from the Auction Section, causing what prosecutors described as a total loss to the public treasury.
In his order, the judge said the investigator had treated custody and auction officials inconsistently. Preventive Officers Mehwish Khan, Maryam Mukhtar and Sumbal Imran, along with auction supervisor Aftab Kalhoro, were listed as prosecution witnesses. The report cleared Khan and Mukhtar, saying they acted in good faith and relied on hierarchy. Khan was the designated officer who scrutinized the papers and issued the gate pass. Mukhtar had physical custody of the goods and released the consignment. The judge said the investigator did not address the roles of senior auction officials.
When questioned by the court, the investigator conceded that departmental inquiries are underway against Khan, Mukhtar and Kalhoro, as well as Aslam and others, over the release of the same consignment. The judge said the investigating agency cannot treat officials facing such proceedings as truthful, exonerated witnesses in a criminal trial. He said the approach suggested an attempt to shield supervisors and put the blame on junior staff and other accused.
Aslam, a low-ranking sepoy, alleged that money was distributed to officers, including 2.5 million rupees to Sumbal Imran through an intermediary, Zain Ullah Shah. The investigator dismissed the claim as false without examining banking records, the judge noted.
The court also faulted the investigation for failing to recover any of the goods, which included hundreds of tablets, AirPods Pro earbuds, Marshall and JBL speakers and Meta Quest headsets. The bidder, Talha Hafeez, who operates a retail shop at Star Plaza in Saddar, was arrested and held on remand, but no search was carried out. Prosecutors say 15 million rupees in cash was delivered with a counting machine to a co-accused’s residence, yet the investigator made no effort to trace, freeze or seize it, the judge said.
The prosecution relies heavily on WhatsApp screenshots and voice notes, the order said. Aslam never surrendered his phone, and investigators did not seize recipients’ phones, obtain forensic extraction certificates from an authorized laboratory, secure subscriber records or record hash values. A private typist, Qazi Saifuddin, who allegedly helped obtain the gate pass and received 15,000 rupees, was omitted from the lists of accused and witnesses. So was an accountant who allegedly filmed the cash transfer.
The judge also objected to the inclusion of allegations about two earlier vehicle auctions, involving Toyota Passo and Honda Civic cars. He said they involved separate bidders, dates and subject matter and cannot be folded into this case without separate complaints. He further noted that the report itself said the investigation “has not been exhausted” and that a supplementary report would follow, calling the filing of an incomplete report as a final challan “procedurally untenable.”
Khan directed the investigator to reassess the legal status of the officials in light of the departmental inquiries and to determine whether their conduct amounts to criminal negligence or complicity under the Customs Act of 1969. He ordered search and recovery proceedings for the goods and a trace of the cash trail, and he ordered that seized digital devices be sent to an authorized government forensic laboratory. He told the investigator to resolve the status of the typist and the accountant and to exclude the earlier vehicle auctions, which the collector of customs may pursue separately.
The judge warned Mushtaq that if he suppressed facts, shielded officers or failed to trace the property, the court would not hesitate to start proceedings against him. These could include departmental action, criminal proceedings under the Pakistan Penal Code for fabricating false evidence and screening offenders, and action under the Customs Act.
The order was announced in open court, and copies were directed to the director general of customs in Islamabad, the collector of customs enforcement in Karachi and the special public prosecutor.
The order is not a finding of guilt, and the accused are presumed innocent unless convicted.
