JEHANZEB vs N.A.B. and others

ORDER

' SH. RIAZ AHMED, C.J.--- This petition for leave to appeal calls in question the order dated 27th of November, 2002 whereby a learned Division Bench of the Lahore High Court dismissed three writ petitions preferred on behalf of petitioner Aga Jehanzeb and two others seeking post-arrest bail in case F.I.R. No,130, dated 16th of March, 2001 registered with Police Station Civil Lines, Lahore, on charges under sections 406/420/467/468 and 471, Pakistan Penal Code with direction to the Investigating Agency to submit the challan before the trial Court within as fortnight and the latter to conclude the trial expeditiously, possibly on day to day basis.

2. It is alleged that (Aga Jehanzeb) petitioner who happened to an experienced banker had manoeuvred the fraud by purchasing stamp-paper for preparing the fake Bank guarantee and the same was handed over to. Muhammad Arif Ijaz Khokhar, who subsequently entrusted the same to Muhammad Tanvir. It is stated that during the investigation, and amount of Rs,10,28,625 and 1,00,000 US dollar has been recovered from him. In addition thereto, it is stated that petitioner is also involved in case F.I.R. No,131, dated 16th of March, 2001 registered with Police Station Civil Lines, Lahore on charges under sections 406/420/467/468/461, Pakistan Penal Code. In this criminal case, it is stated that petitioner had dishonestly obtained financial facility to the tune of Rs,208 million from the Emirates Bank causing wrongful loss to the bank. It is alleged that petitioner had received his share of Rs,68,00,000 through cheque.

3. Mr. Muhammad Farooq Bedar, Advocate Supreme Court for the petitioner submits that petitioner was not named in the F.I.R., nor there exists any evidence toshow his active involvement in the crime. The co-accused of the petitioner Arif Khokhar has already been granted bail by the High Court, therefore, following the rule of consistency, petitioner deserves the grant of bail. It was contended that petitioner is in continuous detention for the last about two years, and the trial is not in sight in near future, the complete challan has not been submitted so far and the prosecution has submitted a list of 83 witnesses to be examined besides voluminous documentary evidence.

4. Mr. M. Ibrahim Satti, Advocate Supreme Court for the NAB states that challan has been submitted, proceedings against absconders in terms of sections 87 and 88, Criminal Procedure Code have been completed, and the formal proclamation has also been issued against them and the period of two months is going to lapse on 2nd of May, 2003. It is stated that on that day charge will be framed and the trial would commence accordingly.

5. When questioned that under the NAB Ordinance trial is to conclude within 30 days. Mr. M. Ibrahim Satti, Advocate Supreme Court submitted that this time period is not mandatory but directory for the time being we would refrain from expressing any opinion as to whether the timeframe is mandatory or directory, but would direct that after submission of challan in this case on 7th of May, 2003 if the trial does not commence or conclude within 30 days from the said date, petitioner would automatically become entitled to the grant of bail subject to his furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs,five millions with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court at Lahore.

' Both petitions disposed of.