ORDER SHEET

        IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH AT KARACHI

           

Cr. Bail Application No.487 of 2012

(Manzoor Ali vs. The State)

        Order with signature of Judge

 

 

For hearing

 

-.-.-.-.-.-.-.

 

Mr. Khaleeq Ahmed Advocate for the applicant/accused Manzoor Ali.

Mr. Ashfaq Ahmed Tagar DAG alongwith Syed Israr Ali Additional Director Law, FIA and SI Nafees Ahmed FIA.

 

-.-.-.-.-.

 

NAIMATULLAH PHULPOTO,J.- Applicant/accused Manzoor Ali                     seeks pre-arrest bail in Crime No.21/2012 registered against him and others at P.S, F.I.A, CBC, Karachi, on 27.04.2012 under Sections 420/468/471/109 PPC read with section 5(2) of PCA-II, 1947.

2.                Brief facts of the prosecution case, as disclosed in the FIR are that on 27.04.2012 SI Nisar Ahmed Sawand of FIA Sukkur lodged FIR on behalf of the state on basis of inquiry No.51/2011, regarding embezzlement of government funds of Rs.10398400/- sanctioned to eliminate hepatitis diseases. Such report was incorporated in the FIR alleging therein that during inquiry, the discrepancies in PCR hepatitis reports of the patients came on surface. It was further revealed that a member of Social Welfare Organization namely Javed Shah opened an account in UBL Naushero Feroze Branch in the name of Citi Lab and cheques for PCR hepatitis reports issued by treasury office were deposited there and cross cheques collected by UBL from NBP Naushero Feroze were credited in the account of Citi Lab, but Citi Lab Lahore denied any agreement with EDO Health, Naushero Feroze, who had sent PCR tests bills in the name of Citi Lab without mention of Lahore. It is further alleged that inquiry committee fixed responsibility on focal person former EDO Health, treasury officer, Javed Shah, Abdul Sattar Bank officials of NBP and UBL Naushero Feroze and others.

3.                After registration of the FIR, applicant/accused Manzoor Ali applied for pre-arrest bail before trial court, but the same was declined by order dated 10th May 2012 mainly on the ground that matter was under investigation. Thereafter applicant/ accused Manzoor Ali approached this Court for similar relief.

4.                Mr. Khaleeq Ahmed learned counsel for the applicant/ accused Manzoor Ali argued that applicant/ accused passed cheque of Rs.537,200/-. It is further argued that this is not the case of embezzlement, prosecution case is based upon documentary evidence. There is no question of tempering with evidence, co-accused Ali Sher Sial and Mohammad Soomar have already been granted bail after arrest by the trial court and case of applicant/accused is identical to that of co-accused.

5.                Mr. Mr. Ashfaq Ahmed Tagar DAG, appearing for the state could not controvert the contentions of learned defence counsel and admitted that case of applicant/accused is identical to the case of co-accused Ali Sher Sial and Mohammad Soomar, who have already been granted bail by the trial court.

6.                From perusal of the order dated 2nd June 2012, it transpires that co-accused Ali Sher Sial and Mohammad Soomar have been granted bail by the trial court for the following reasons:-

“Perusal of R&P reveals that bail applications of both accused were dismissed by this court therefore after submission of Challan against the accused they have filed fresh bail applications. The supplementary interim charge sheet reveals that co accused Dr. Muhammad Asif was not sent up for trial therefore after acceptance of Challan he was released, whereas co accused Javed Ali Shah and Abdul Sattar are still absconders. The allegations against both accused are that in connivance with co accused the misappropriation in the state funds aggregating to Rs.10398400/- were made but Dr. Muhammad Asif has not been challaned by the I.O whereas co accused Mazhar Ali Hisbani has sought interim pre-arrest from the Hon’ble High Court of Sindh and co accused Muhammad Malook also admitted on interim pre-arrest bail by this court. The documents of the case have been seized and the investigation of the case is completed, therefore, in such circumstances and after considering the grounds raised by learned advocates for the applicants/accused both the above named applicants/ accused are hereby admitted on post arrest bail subject to furnishing surety in the sum of Rs.18,00,000/- each with P.R bond of like amount to the satisfaction of this Court and also direct the applicants/accused to deposit their passports, if any, with this Court.    

 

 

7.                Case of applicant/ accused is identical to that of co-accused Ali Sher and Mohammad Soomar, so far the merits of the case are concerned, Investigation of case has been completed, applicant/accused is no more required for investigation, prosecution case is based upon documentary evidence, there is no question of tempering with the evidence. Allegation against applicant/ accused with regard to participation in crime is yet to be proved by the prosecution at trial. As regards, the conditions for grant of pre-arrest bail are concerned, in the case of MUHAMMAD RAMZAN V/S ZAFAR ULLAH AND ANOTHER (1986 S C M R 1380), it is held as under:-

“After hearing the learned counsel we feel that prima facie, at this stage, the case of the petitioner is not distinguishable from that of others to whom bail has been allowed. No useful purpose would be served if the bail of Zafar Ullah Khan respondent is cancelled on any technical ground because after arrest he would again be allowed bail on the ground that similarly placed other accused are already on bail. We, therefore, in the circumstances of this case, do not consider it a fit case for grant of leave to appeal. This petition accordingly, is dismissed.”

 

8.                For the above stated reasons, on rule of consistency, we hold that prima facie case for grant of pre-arrest bail to applicant/accused is made out. Interim pre-arrest bail granted to the applicant/accused on 14.05.2012 is hereby confirmed on the same terms and conditions.

9.                These are the reasons for the short order announced by us on 10th September 2012.

 

JUDGE

 

 

JUDGE