Pakistan Case LawDinshaw Hoshang Anklesaria Versus National Accountability Bureau (NAB) through Chairman and others
This petition for leave to appeal arose from the Islamabad High Court's refusal to grant post-arrest bail to the petitioner in a National Accountability Bureau (NAB) reference. The petitioner, a director of a construction firm, was accused of utilizing political influence to illegally acquire and amalgamate state land with amenity land, causing significant loss to the public exchequer. The core legal question was whether the petitioner was entitled to post-arrest bail given the circumstances of the case, the duration of his incarceration, and the status of the trial. The Supreme Court observed that the petitioner had been incarcerated for twenty months without the trial commencing, that the prosecution's evidence was primarily documentary, and that other co-accused were at liberty. Furthermore, the Prosecutor General, NAB, did not oppose the bail. The Court held that the petitioner had established a case for bail, emphasizing the right to liberty pending trial when the conclusion of proceedings is not in sight. Consequently, the Court granted bail, subject to the petitioner furnishing bail bonds and placing his name on the Exit Control List.
- Is a petitioner entitled to post-arrest bail when the trial has not commenced after a significant period of incarceration and the prosecution's evidence is primarily documentary?
- Can the Supreme Court grant bail in a NAB reference if the Prosecutor General, NAB, does not oppose the petition?
- Does the fact that co-accused are enjoying liberty constitute a valid ground for granting bail to a petitioner in a corruption reference?
ORDER
SAYYED MAZAHAR ALI AKBAR NAQVI, J.---Through this petition under Article 185(3) of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, the petitioner seeks post-arrest bail in a NAB Reference. The same relief was denied to him by the learned Islamabad High Court, Islamabad vide impugned judgment dated 07.08.2019.
2.Briefly stated the allegation against the petitioner is that he being 50% shareholder of Messrs Galaxy Construction in connivance with the officials of the Government of Sindh and by exerting political pressure illegally got allotted additional land measuring 2769 square yards and 1081.1 1 square yards of Bagh-e-Ibn-e-Qasim in favour of Messrs Galaxy Construction; that he illegally got amalgamated plot Nos. 5 and 6 with the amenity land of Bagh-e-Ibn-e-Qasim and enhanced the area from 9436 square yards to 17336 square yards and in collaboration with co-accused raised construction of two towers i.e. Bahria Icon Towers of 62 and 42 floors over the said amenity land, thereby causing huge loss to the public exchequer .
3.This case was partly heard on 09.12.2 020 when learned counsel for the petitioner had made his submissions. Learned counsel for the petitioner inter alia contender that the petitioner is a businessman dealing with the business of construction; that no proof of exerting pressure on the officials of Board of Revenue has been placed on record; that the allegation that the petitioner exercised political influence is not correct as at the time of allotment of plot, the petitioner was not the Advisor of the Chief Minister Sindh; that the land in question was neither amenity nor part of Bagh-e-Ibn-e-Qasim; that Messrs Galaxy Construction had sold its 50% shares to Bahria Town in 2007- 08 and allowed Bahria Town to have its own Chief Executive in the operations of Messrs Galaxy Construction; that in-fact Bahria Icon Towers were constructed by Bahria Town and no action has been taken against the co-accused rather it has been informed that his plea bargain is still under process since 21.11.2019, which could not be justified under the scheme of law .
4.Learned Prosecutor General, NAB, who entered appearance in response to the Court call opted not to contest the hail petition. He in categorical terms stated that he has no objection if the petitioner is released on bail. However , he prayed that sufficient securi ty and other clogs prohibiting the petitioner to leave the country may be placed by this Court.
5.Admittedly , petitioner is a Director in Messrs Galaxy Construction (Pvt.) Ltd. The main accusation against the petitioner is that he while being in politic al authority exerted political pressure and grabbed the state land while amalgamating the same with plot Nos. 5 and 6 belonging to the Messrs Galaxy Construction, which is allotted on 24.07.2008. It has been brought to our notice that the petitioner was taken into custody on 23.04.2019 and since then he is behind the bars. Though Reference has been filed but there are 86 witnesses whose testimony is to be recorded before the Trial Court. Rest of the evidence is in the possession of the prosecution, which is in the documentary form and there is no likelihood of any tampering or manipulation. The petitioner has already suffered 20 months of incarceration without even commencement of trial, which clearly reflects that the conclusion of the same is not in sight in near future. Even otherwise, it has been informed that there are 27 accused in all and the majority of the same including the co-accused are enjoying liberty and free life. It is not surprising that the Prosecutor General did not oppose the grant of bail to the petitioner .
6.For what has been discussed above, the petitioner has made out a case for bail. Consequently , we convert this petition into appeal, allow it, set aside the impugned order and grant bail to the petitioner subject to his furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs.10,00,000/- (rupees one million) with two sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court. However , it is directed that the passport of the petitione r be impounded before the Trial Court and his name be placed on the Exit Control List till the final conclusion of the trial.
Cited by 3 cases
- Fawad Ahmed vs National Accountability Bureau and 02 others. 2024 IHC 50, 2024 MLD 1207
- Hussain Lawai vs The State and 2 others 2022 MLD 405
- Taha Raza and others vs The State and others 2022 PCRLJ 838
Judges on this bench
- Sajjad Ali Shah1,895 judgments
- Umar Ata Bandial1,358 judgments