IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, BENCH AT SUKKUR

 

                             BEFORE:-

                    Mr. Justice Arshad Hussain Khan &

                    Mr. Justice Amjad Ali Sahito

 

Criminal Accountability Appeal No. D-25 of 2022

 

Appellant:                     Mansoor Ahmed S/O Abdul Ghaffar, Mahar (Presently confined in Central Prison, Sukkur) through Mr. Qurban Ali Malano, Advocate.

 

The State:                      M/s Mujeeb-ur-Rehman Soomro and Bahawaluddin Shaikh, Special Prosecutors NAB, Sukkur.

 

Dates of hearing: 29.04.2022

 

Date of decision:           29.04.2022

 

 

J U D G M E N T.

 

Amjad Ali Sahito, J. By this judgment, we intend to dispose of the above captioned Crl. Accountability Appeal filed by the appellant Mansoor Ahmed Mahar against the Judgment dated 08.03.2022 whereby he along with co-accused have been convicted and sentenced by the Accountability Court, Sukkur in Reference No. 10/2017 “Re. The State Vs. Abdul Shakoor and others as under:-

          Accused Mansoor Ahmed son of Abdul Ghaffar, Mahar was convicted  under section 265-H(2) Cr.P,.C read with section 10-A of NAO, 1999  and sentenced to suffer R.I for five years and pay fine of Rs. 43,602/- in terms of Section 11 of NAO, 1999. In case he fails to pay fine, it shall be recoverable as arrears of Land Revenue in terms of Section 33-E of NAO,1999. However, he shall be entitled to the benefit of Section 382-B Cr.P.C. He was also disqualified in terms of Section 50 of Ordinance, 1999 for a period of 10 years to be recounted from the date of release after serving out sentence awarded to him and also from seeking or from being elected, chosen, appointed or nominated as a member of respensetaive of any public  body or any statutory or local authority or in service of Pakistan or any province and also he shall not be allowed to obtain any financial facility in the form of loan or advances from any financial institutions controlled by Government for a period of 10 years.

2.      Learned counsel for the appellant submits that he has filed CMA and the required liability amount has been deposited by the appellant through plea bargain application, as such he prayed that the appeal may be decided in accordance with law.

3.     On the other hand learned SPP NAB submits that plea bargain application filed by the appellant has been accepted by D.G NAB Sukkur, as such he has raised no objection for decision of the application in accordance with law.

4.      The allegation against appellant Mansoor Ahmed was that he being Government Contractor in TMA New Sukkur got work order of 1 scheme of construction of Surface Drain and CTT Topping at village Rahuja UC-16 and executed work was found partial at the site, as per expert report, which caused loss to the Govt. Exchequer and gains acquired. Accused Mansoor Ahmed in collusion and connivance with accused Abdul Shakoor, Yar Muhammad, Zahoor Ahmed, Abdul Razaqure and Hakim Ali found involved in missapropriation of Government Funds and acquired gains to the tune of Rs.  87,204/-. His individual liability and gains are Rs. 43,602/-.

5.      During the pendency of this appeal, he filed Application u/s 25 (b) of NAO, 1999 for plea bargaining before the Chairman NAB and the liability amount viz. Rs. 43,602/- was determined and the same was paid to the NAB authorities through Pay Order dated 19.04.2022. The Director-General NAB in the exercise of powers vested to him has accepted the offer as the convict/appellant Mansoor Ahmed Mahar deposited the full payment amount of Rs. 43,602/-.

6.     Resultantly, the accused/appellant namely Mansoor Ahmed Mahar deemed to have been convicted u/s 25 (b) of NAO, 1999 read with 15 (a) of said Ordinance. The appellant shall seize to hold public office, if any, held by him u/s 15 (a) of the NAO, 1999, and shall be disqualified for a period of ten years, which will be reckoned from the date his release after serving the sentence, for seeking or from being elected, chose, appointed or nominated as a member of representative or any public body of any statutory or local authority or in service of Pakistan of any Province. Appellant is in custody. Office is directed to issue release writ for the release of above-named appellant with further directions to concerned Jail Superintendent to release the appellant forthwith, if he is no more required in any other case/crime.

 

Judge

                                                          Judge

IrfanP.A