MANZOOR HUSSAIN SHAHANI vs NATIONAL ACCOUNTABILITY BUREAU and another
This petition for leave to appeal is directed against the judgment of the High Court of Sindh, whereby the petitioner's application for grant of bail was dismissed. The petitioner, former Operation Manager of the National Bank of Pakistan, Sehwan Branch, was implicated in a reference filed by the National Accountability Bureau regarding fraud, misappropriation, and embezzlement of cash totaling Rs. 452,870. The core legal question was whether the petitioner was entitled to post-arrest bail when he had deposited an amount higher than the alleged defalcation through cheques under a pending plea bargain and his custody was no longer required for investigation. The Supreme Court held that since the amount deposited exceeded the alleged misappropriation and finalization of the plea bargain proceedings would take time while the trial was at its initial stage, further detention of the petitioner would serve no useful purpose. The Court converted the petition into an appeal, allowed it, and granted bail to the appellant subject to furnishing surety.
- Whether an accused is entitled to bail when an amount exceeding the allegedly misappropriated sum has been deposited with NAB under a pending plea bargain?
- Does the pendency of plea bargain proceedings warrant the release of an accused on bail when his further custody is not required for investigation?
- Can bail be granted when the trial is at its initial stage and conclusion of proceedings will take considerable time?
' CH. EJAZ YOUSAF, J.---This petition for leave to appeal is directed against judgment dated 27-11- 2007 passed by a learned Division Bench of the High Court of Sindh at Karachi, whereby application filed by the petitioner for grant of bail was dismissed.
2. Facts of the case, iii brief are that a reference was filed by the National Accountability Bureau (hereinafter referred to as the "NAB") against the officers of the National Bank of Pakistan, Sehwan Branch, District Jamshoro, regarding fraud, misappropriation and embezzlement of cash. The case was detected in July, 2005, wherein the present petitioner and one Ahmed Ali the were involved. It was alleged that the petitioner while posted in the said Branch as Operation Manager, from 24th December, 1997 to 20th April, 2005, was joint custodian of cash which was found deficient as per audit report. It was further alleged that a total sum of Rs,452,870 was embezzled by the petitioner.
3. It has been contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that since a sum of Rs,6,32,870 has been paid through cheques by the petitioner to the NAB Authorities as against the alleged defalcated amount of Rs,4,52,870 and on acceptance of the plea bargain the petitioner would be required to be released or otherwise the charge would have to be substantiated at the trial through evidence by the prosecution which would take a considerable time, therefore, pending proceedings in the case the petitioner deserves to be released on bail as his further custody will serve no useful purpose. He has added that the petitioner has already suffered a lot as his services have been terminated by the bank on account of the alleged defalcation.
4. Learned counsel for the respondent/NAB, on the other hand, has urged that since as per audit report the petitioner was involved in misappropriation of money, therefore, the learned High Court was justified in not allowing bail to him. He has not controverted that a sum of Rs,6,32,870 has been paid by the petitioner to the NAB authorities, through cheques under the plea bargain, however, started that the deal has not yet, been finalized. He has also not denied that custody of the petitioner is no more required for the purpose of recovery and that the case before the trial Court is at its initial stage.
5. We have given our anxious consideration to the respective contentions of the learned counsel for the parties and have also perused the available record with their assistance. It has not been denied by the learned counsel for the respondents that the case is at initial stage and a sum of Rs,6,32,870 has been deposited by the petitioner through cheques under the plea bargain with the NAB authorities, which is more than the allegedly misappropriated amount of Rs,4,52,870, and finalization of the proceedings under the plea bargain, would require some time, on completion whereof the petitioner in any case would have to be released, therefore, in our view, a case of grant of bail is made out in favour of the petitioner. Resultantly this petition is converted into appeal and allowed. The appellant, Manzoor Hussin Shahani son of Haji Lahno, is allowed bail subject to his furnishing surety in the sum of Rs,200,000 (Rs, Two lac) with P.R. Bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court.
' These are the reasons of our short order of even date announced in open Court.