ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH BENCH AT SUKKUR

Crl. Bail Application No. D-31 of 2022

(Nazeer Ahmed Phulpoto Vs. The State)

Before;

Mr. Justice Zafar Ahmed Rajput,

Mr. Justice Irshad Ali Shah

1. For Orders on office objection.

2. For hearing of Post Arrest Bail Application.

22-02-2023.

Mr. Dareshani Ali Hyder “Ada”, advocate for the applicant.

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

Mr. Karim Bux Janwari, Assistant Attorney General, Pakistan.

>>>>>…<<<<<

Irshad Ali Shah, J; It is the case of the prosecution that the applicant with rest of the culprits withdrawn an amount of Rs. 11,04,57,507/- from TMA Garhi Yaseen against the work of different schemes which was neither executed, if executed was not according to specification, for that he was booked by NAB authorities by filing such Reference against him and others.

2. On having been refused bail by learned Judge, Accountability Court, Sukkur, the applicant has sought for the same from this Court by way of instant Bail Application u/s 497 Cr.P.C r/w section 9 (B) NAB Ordinance, 1999.

3. It is contended by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant being innocent has been involved in this case falsely by the NAB authorities, he is in custody for more than three years without effective progress in trial of his case; his individual liability as per report dated 16-02-2023 furnished by Investigating Officer NAB Sukkur is only to the extent of Rs. 15,34,018/- and co-accused Muhammad Aslam Dayo with utmost similar role has already been admitted to bail by this Court. By contending so, he sought for release of the applicant on bail on point of further inquiry and consistency. In support of his contention, he has relied upon case of Dinshaw Housing Anklesaria Vs. National Accountability Burue, through its Chairman and others (2021 SCMR 699.

4. Learned Special Prosecutors NAB and learned Assistant Attorney General, Pakistan have opposed to release of the applicant on bail by contending that he with rest of the culprits have caused huge loss to the public exchequer.

5. Heard arguments and perused the record.

6. Apparently, the applicant is a contractor; his liability is only to the extent Rs. 15,34,018/- and is in custody for more than 03 years. As per progress report furnished by learned trial Court, on joining of co-accused Muhammad Aslam, charge against the applicant has been amended, which clearly reflected that the conclusion of his case is not sight in near future. Co-accused Muhammad Aslam with utmost similar role has already been admitted to bail. In this circumstance, the applicant is found entitled to be released on bail on point of further inquiry and consistency.

7. In view of above, the applicant is admitted to bail subject to his furnishing surety in sum of Rs. 300,000/- (Three lacs) and P.R bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of learned trial Court.

8. The instant Crl. Bail Application is disposed of accordingly.

Judge

Judge

Nasim/P.A