IN
THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH BENCH AT SUKKUR
C.P.No.D- 3615 of 2016.
A/wC.P.Nos.D- 173, 195, 238, 369, 588 and 590 of 2018
Date |
Order with signature of Judge |
Before:
Mr.JusticeNazar
Akbar
Mr.Justice
Muhammad Faisal Kamal Alam
-
Petitioners:
1.AbdulKhaliqPahinyar
In
C.P.No.D3615/2016&
Bashir
Ahmed in
C.P.No.D-238/2018. Through
Mr.Nisar Ahmed
Bhanbhro Advocate,.
2.AbdulKhaliqMazari
C.P.No.D-173/2018,
Khadim
Hussain in
C.P.No.D-
195/2018&
Barkat
Ali Bhangwar in
C.P.No.D-369/2018. Through Mr.Wasem Ahmed Sundrani,
Advocate.
3.SyedEssab
Shah in
In
C.P.No.D-588/2018
&
Hakim Ali in
C.P.No.D-
590/2018. Through Mr.AbdulBaqi Jan Kakar,
Advocate.
Respondents.
Chairman NAB and ors. Through Mr.MujeeburRehman Soomro,
Special Prosecutor.
Date
of Hearing 09th March, 2021.
O R D E R.
NAZAR
AKBAR, J- By this common order, we intend
to dispose of the above captioned constitutional petitions filed by the
petitioners Abdul KhaliqPanhiyar, Abdul KhaliqMazari, Khadim Hussain, Bashir Ahmed, Barkat Ali, Syed Essab Shah and Hakim Ali seeking pre-arrest bail in
Reference No.12 of 2018, pending adjudication before the Accountability Court
at Sukkur.
2. It is alleged that the petitioners/accused
officers/officials of Highways Division Kashmore at Kandhkot and private petitioners/accused being Government
Contractors have jointly and severally committed an offence of corruption and
corrupt practices in connivance with each other by executing substandard and
incomplete work in various road schemes situated at District Kashmsore at Kandhkot and
Jacobabad and thereafter excessive payments were allowed by the
officers/officials to the contractors for which the contractors were not
entitled which caused loss to the Government exchequer and gains acquired. The
officials petitioners failed to exercise their lawful authority and rendered
undue benefits to private petitioners/Government Contractors, which resulted
loss and misappropriation of the Government funds and gains acquired by accused
to the tune of Rs.3,47,59,524/-The
petitioners/accused committed the offence of corruption and corrupt practice
and after completing the investigation, the aforementioned reference was filed
against the petitioners/accused.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners mainly
contended that the petitioners have been implicated in this case by the NAB
authorities with malafide intention and ulterior
motives; that no such loss has been caused to the Government exchequer by the
petitioners. Learned counsel for the
petitioners after arguing the matter at some length, submitted that though the
allegations leveled against the petitioners in the reference are false but inspite of that they are ready to furnish security/surety
equivalent to the extent of loss allegedly caused to Government exchequer by
each of the petitioner individually as allegedly attributed to each one of them
within a reasonable time.
4. Learned Special Prosecutor NAB assisted by
I.O has objected to the acceptance of such proposal even if the entire amount
is secured. He has contended that in one of the cases the Honourable
Court has disapproved this kind of concession at the bail stage.
5. We have heard arguments advanced by the
learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record.
6. The material available on record, it
reveals that the documentary evidence has already been collected by the Investigating
Officer and there is no apprehension of tampering with the evidence as all the
P.Ws are official witnesses. The reference has already been filed against the
petitioners before the Accountability Court at Sukkur, where in the charge has
been framed and some of the PWs have already been examined by the trial
Court. The petitioners are regularly
attending this Court as well as trial Court and did not misuse the concession
of interim pre-arrest bail extended to them. The petitioners are voluntarily furnishing
security/surety of the liability amount as leveled against each one of them in
the impugned Reference No.18 of 2019.The Honourable
Supreme Court also granted bail to an accused on similar terms as proposed
above.
7. The
contention of learned counsel for the NAB that the Honourable
Supreme Court in the case of Rai Mohammad Khan
reported in 2017 SCMR 1152 has been rebutted by learned counsel for the
petitioners by placing reliance on two unreported judgments of Honourable Supreme Court passed in (1) C.P.No.
2300 of 2018 & C.P.No.1175 of 2020. In Civil
Petition No.1175-K/2020 and the
relevant portion of the order dated 26.11.2020 is reproduced as under:-
“We have observed that bulk of
accused nominated in the reference are enlarged on bail either due to
acceptance of plea bargain or had deposited their incurred liability with the
trial court. Otherwise we have been informed that as per order of
Accountability Court, Sukkur dated 27.07.2020 a letter bearing No.ABL/JCD/2(20) dated 27.07.2020 from Allied Bank Limited Jacobabad
Branch was received to the trial court
wherein it is submitted that DD bearing No.BBB1351295 dated 20.07.2020
amounting to Rs.34,72,100/- is genuine and the entry of the same has been made
in the register in the name of trial court. It is noticed that the pre-arrest bail of co-accused Mujeeb-ur-Rehman
has been confirmed on deposit of
pay-order in civil petition No.277-K/2020 by this Court vide order dated
15.07.2020. The petitioner has already deposited his individual liability of
Rs.34,72,100/- before the learned trial court and
leave this case has already been granted on 07.08.2020 at Karachi Branch
Registry of this Court, hence, in the interest of safe administration of
criminal justice, the petitioner be released on bail subject to his furnishing
bail bond in the sum of Rs.5,00,000/= with two sureties each in the like amount
to the satisfaction of the learned trail court”.
8.
Similar view was taken by Honourable
Supreme Court in judgment in the case of Mumtaz Ali v
The State through Chairman NAB in C.P.No.1149-K of 2018. This judgement is reproduced below:-
“Mr.Muhammad
Ashraf Kazi Senior Advocate
Supreme Court, submits that the petitioner is ready and willing to deposit with
the trial Court the entire amount of his liability so far determined by the
prosecution.
Syed Amjad Ali Shah learned DPG
NAB present in Court waives the notice and submits that in view of the case of Shamraiz Khan v The State (2000 SCMR 157) he would have no
objection for the grant of a bail to the petitioner subject to his depositing
the entire amount of his liability in this case being Rs.61,79,238/-
(Rupees Sixty One Lac, Seventy Nine Thousand, Two Hundred and Thirty
Eight) with the Additional Registrar of this Court at
Brach Registry Karachi.
In
these circumstances, this petition is converted into an appeal and allowed, the
petitioner is admitted to bail subject to his depositing with the Additional
Registrar of this Court the above amount”.
9. These
judgments are subsequent in time and passed by three members
bench of Honourable Supreme Court whereas the
reliance placed by learned counsel for NAB on the case reported in 2017 SCMR
1152 was earlier in time and the judgment is delivered by two member bench.
10. In view of above, the interim pre-arrest
bail already granted to petitioners Abdul KhaliqPahinyar,
Abdul KhaliqMazari, Khadim Hussain Panhiyar, Bashir Ahmed Khan, Barkat Ali Bhangwar, Syed Essab Shah and Hakim Ali is hereby confirmed subject to
depositing entire amount of Rs.63,39,045/-,
Rs.10,49,896/-Rs.12,60,894/-, Rs.15,65,973/-, Rs.25,71,137/-, Rs.44,48,846/-
& Rs.18,60,056/- through pay ordersequivalent to their respective individual
liabilities as mentioned in the above Reference, within a period of 15
days and P.R Bonds in the like amount to
the satisfaction of learned Trial Court. Failure whereof, the interim
pre-arrest bail granted to the aforementioned petitioners shall stand recalled
on expiry of 15 days from today and the petitioners will be taken into custody
and remanded to jail till deposit of the above amounts.
11. The observations made hereinabove are
tentative in nature and will not influence the learned trial Court while deciding
the reference on merits.
12. The aforementioned petitions are disposed of
in above terms.
JUDGE
JUDGE
Akber.