Syed GHAZANFAR YOUSUF vs THE STATE
This matter concerns an application filed by the accused, Syed Ghazanfar Yousuf, seeking a modification of a bail order previously granted by the Sindh High Court on 17-12-2003. The original order had granted bail to the applicant conditional upon the deposit of Rs. 600,000 in cash with the Nazir of the Court, in addition to furnishing surety and a P.R. bond. The applicant sought to modify this condition by requesting that the cash deposit requirement be waived and replaced solely by the provision of surety. The core legal question was whether the court should deviate from the established precedent requiring a cash deposit as a condition for bail in financial cases. Upon reviewing the precedent set by the Supreme Court of Pakistan in Shamraiz v. State (2000 SCMR 157), the High Court observed that the Supreme Court had confirmed bail subject to a cash deposit. Finding no cogent reason to deviate from this authoritative dictum, the Court dismissed the application, holding that the condition of depositing the disputed amount remains valid and necessary for bail.
- Can a court modify a bail condition requiring a cash deposit to one requiring only surety?
- Is the condition of depositing a disputed amount as a prerequisite for bail supported by Supreme Court precedent?
- Does the court have discretion to waive a cash deposit condition for bail in financial matters?
ORDER
1. ' GHULAM RABBANI, Granted.
2. By order dated 17-12-2003, applicant Syed Ghazanfar Yousaf was granted bail on the condition that he would deposit the amount involved in the matter viz. Rs.6,00,000 with the Nazir of this Court and would also furnish surety in the same amount with P.R. Bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court. The instant application has been filed on his behalf seeking modification of the said order to the extent that instead of depositing cash, as ordered with the Nazir, applicant be ordered to be released on furnishing surety in the amount so fixed.
2. 'We have heard both Mr. S. Bahadur Ali Naqvi learned counsel for applicant and Mr. Khursheed Hashmi, learned D.A.-G. For the State and with their assistance we have gone through the order dated 17-12-2003.
3. ' Perusal of the said order reflects that the bail was urged on the basis, of rule laid down by the Honourable Supreme Court of Pakistan in the case of Shamraiz v. State 2000 SCM R 157. We have gone through the authoritative pronouncement in the said decision arid find that the interim bail granted to the applicant therein was confirmed subject to deposit of an amount of Rs.49,400,391.
4. Learned D.A.-G. Has submitted that in many identical cases bails have been granted to accused persons following the dictum laid down in the above cited cases. No cogent reason has been advanced to deviate from the above dictum. In .The circumstances, we do not find any substance in this application and dismiss the same.