ORDER SHEET

 

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, CIRCUIT COURT, LARKANA

 

2nd Criminal Bail Appln. No. S-30 of 2025

 

 

Applicant

 

Khalid Hussain s/o Dildar Hussain Shaikh

 

 

Through Mr. Safdar Ali Ghouri, advocate

 

 

 

The State

 

Through Mr. Mr. Muhammad Noonari, D.P.G. and Bahawaluddin Shaikh, S.P.P (NAB), Sukkur.

 

Date of hearing

 

28-03-2025

Date of order

 

28-03-2025

 

 

SHAMSUDDIN ABBASI, J.- Through instant criminal bail application, the applicant/accused Khalid Hussain s/o Dildar Hussain Shaikh, seeks post-arrest bail in Crime No. GO-02/2017, registered at Police Station A.C.E Larkana, for the offence U/S 409, 467, 468, 420, 477-A, 34 P.P.C, after rejection of his bail plea by the learned trial court vide order dated 19.11.2024.

2.                               It is matter of record that initially the F.I.R was registered by Anticorruption Police against contracts and officials of Town Committee/T.M.A Bakrani for misappropriation of amount. The matter was referred to NAB and NAB authorities after inquiry and investigation filed Reference No.09/2017 and thereafter NAB also filed supplementary reference No. 01/2018 before NAB Court Sukkur. The applicant approached to High Court by filing C.P No. D-2046/2017 for grant of pre-arrest bail and same was declined by this Court vide order dated 29.11.2018. Thereafter neither he has approached to Hon'ble Supreme Court nor surrendered before the trial court. He was arrested on 05.07.2024 after more than five yers and trial court has declared him proclaimed offender by initiating proceedings U/S 87 and 88 Cr.P.C. he moved post arrest bail before the learned NAB Court Sukkur which was declined by learned NAB Court Sukkur vide order dated 08.07.2024 only on the point that he after joining trial remained absconder for more than five years, therefore, he is not entitled for grant of bail. Thereafter the case was transferred to Anticorruption Court and he again applied for post arrest bail in the court of learned Special Judge for Anticorruption Court Larkana, whereby his post arrest bail was declined by learned Anticorruption Court vide order dated 29.11.2024, hence this application.

3.                               Learned counsel for the applicant has mainly contended that Hon'ble Supreme Court has granted pre-arrest bail to all accused and he has placed on record bail granting order of co-accused Shahabuddin, Dileep Kumar, Masood Ahmed and others and case of applicant is on identical footings and he is also entitled for same relief on merits. Now he remained in custody for 8 months. He relied upon the case laws reported on the point of abscondence as 2009 SCMR 299, 2016 SCMR 676 and 2023 SCMR 172. He further consented that applicant is ready to furnish surety amount as well as deposit the security amount.

4.                               Learned S.P.P NAB and D.P.G have jointly argued the case and opposed for grant of bail on the ground that he remained fugitive of law and trial court declared him proclaimed offender after initiating proceedings against him U/S 87 and 88 Cr.P.C; that sufficient material is available on record which connects him for alleged offence which comes within the ambit of prohibitory clause of Section 497 Cr.P.C. They further submit that case of prosecution rests on the documentary evidence which connects him in the alleged offence which comes within the ambit of prohibitory clause of section 497 Cr.P.C.

5.                               Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned S.P.P NAB D.P.G. and perused the material available on the record.

6.                               Admittedly Hon'ble Supreme Court has granted bail to all accused. Learned counsel for the applicant has placed on record copy of Civil Petition No.2231 of 2019, whereby co-accused were admitted on pre-arrest bail vide order dated 14.06.2022. Relevant portion of order is reproduced as under:-

"We have examined the documents relied upon, mainly the Investigation Report and the Reference and we note that although the description of the cheques and the names of the contractors have been provided in great detail, the Reference does not provide for the details of the contracts against which it is stated that no work is done or for which the Petitioners and Respondent No.1 made payments. There is no mention of any specific details of the works, the contracts or even the dates of the inspection on the basis of which it was discovered that there are no measurement books and no work orders or that the works were never authorized. Learned Prosecutor when confronted was unable to refer to any material which connects the Petitioners and Respondent No.1 with the alleged corruption and misuse of authority. Although he relies on the details of the cheques issued, there is no evidence on the record to substantiate the claim that the cheques were issued for works not carried out. Hence, these allegations need to be established during the trial which is pending. We are informed that out of 22 witnesses, 12 have been examined before the Trial Court and the Petitioners are appearing before the Court and attending the hearings. We are also informed that the entire record is in the custody of NAB and that all co-accused have been granted bail.

5. Under these circumstances, the Petitioners have made out a prima facie case for grant of pre-arrest bail, therefore, Civil Petition Nos. 1496-K to 1498-K of 2018 are converted into appeals and allowed; ad interim pre-arrest bail already granted to the Petitioners vide order dated 21.01.2019 is confirmed subject to their furnishing fresh bail bonds in the sum of Rs.500,000/- each with one surety each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court.

7.                               Case of applicant is identical to the case of co-accused who were admitted on pre-arrest bail. No doubt he remained absconder for more than five years. The only reason assigned by learned trial courts for refusal of his bail on the point of abscondence. I have gone through the case law relied upon by the learned counsel for the applicant wherein it has been held that bail cannot be declined only on the ground of abscondence otherwise if his case is made out for grant of bail. Merely abscondence would not come in his way. Reliance is placed on record on the case of Mitho Pitafi reported in 2009 SCMR 299, case of Hidayat Khan reported in 2023 SCMR 172 and Said Bibi reported in 2024 SCMR 464. No doubt case of applicant is on identical footing who were admitted on pre-arrest bail granted by Hon'ble Supreme Court vide order dated 14.06.2022. He is in custody since 05.07.2024. He remained for sufficient time in custody.

8.                               Accordingly, in view of above, instant criminal bail application is allowed. Applicant is admitted on post arrest bail subject to furnishing solvent surety in the sum of Rupees One Million only and P.R bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of learned trial court.

9.                               Needless to mention here that the observations made hereinabove are tentative in nature and would not influence the learned trial court while deciding the case of either party at trial.

 

J U D G E

 

Abdul Salam/P.A