ORDER  SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, KARACHI

Cr. Appeal No.84 of 2015

________________________________________________________

Date                         Order with signature of Judge

________________________________________________________

For hearing of M.A. No.2271/2015        

14.07.2015

Mr. Amanullah Khan Yousufzai, Advocate for Appellant  

Mr. Azizullah Burriro, DAG

    -------------------------

This appeal is arising out of judgment dated 21.03.2015, passed by learned Special Court (Offences in Banks) Sindh at Karachi, in Case No.119 of 2011 (FIR No.55 of 2011), whereby, the appellant and co-accused Zaheer Ahmed were convicted under Section 420/468/471/109 PPC each and sentenced them to suffer 7 years R.I for each count and fine of Rs.20 Lacs each. The appellant and co-accused Zaheer Ahmed were also convicted to suffer 3 years R.I and fine of Rs.20 lacs under Section 406 PPC.

2.      Learned counsel for the appellant argued that during the trial, appellant was on bail and he was taken into custody on the day when the judgment was announced. He further argued that though this is a case of short sentence but on merits, he argued that not a single prosecution witness has implicated the appellant directly but trial Court without appreciating the evidence recorded in the case convicted the appellant also. He further argued that the appellant has no connection with Thatta Cement Factory but his father namely Muhammad Rafiq was contractor. He further argued that appellant has also no concern with the co-accused Zaheer Ahmed who was employee of the Thatta Cement Factory. Learned trial Court also failed to consider contradiction in the deposition of the witnesses.

3.      Learned DAG argued that he has gone through the paper book and deposition of the witnesses but he did not find out anything against the present appellant, which may have been deposed by the prosecution witnesses in the trial Court.

4.      We have examined the deposition of prosecution witnesses and we are of the tentative view that the prosecution witnesses have not directly implicated the present appellant. It is also well settled that at the time of grant of bail either under Section 497 or 426 Cr.P.C. deeper appreciation is not required to be made which can only be done by the trial Court or the appellate Court at the time of hearing of appeal. The present appellant was already on bail during trial and the ground raised in the memo of appeal need to be considered at the time of hearing of main appeal. Keeping in view the aforesaid circumstances, we are inclined to suspend the sentence and grant bail to the appellant subject to solvent surety in the sum of Rs.500,000/- (rupees five lac) with P.R bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of Nazir of this court. The appellant shall appear in person on each and every date before this court. Office is directed to fix this appeal for regular hearing immediately after summer vacations.

6.      The miscellaneous application No.2271 of 2015 is disposed of.

                                                                   JUDGE

                             JUDGE

Faizan