ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH BENCH AT SUKKUR

C.P No. D-73 of 2016

Date	Order with signature of Judge

For Katcha Peshi.

19-05-2016

Mr. Zulifqar Ali Naich, advocate holding brief on behalf of Mr. Ubedullah K. Ghotto, advocate for the petitioners a/w the petitioners.

Mr. Abdul Karim Luhrani, SPP NAB (Sukkur).

Mr. Mian Mumtaz Rabbani, learned D.A.G.

.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-

Learned counsel who is holding brief to learned counsel for the petitioners, under instructions, submits that in the same reference bearing No. 25 of 2015 (State v/s Abdul Majeed Soomro and others), the main accused, namely, Abdul Majeed Soomro has been granted ad-interim bail by this court vide order dated 03.05.2016 passed in C.P No. D-198/2016, he however requests that the petitioners in the instant matter, otherwise, have not been assigned any direct role in the alleged commission of the offence, who are regularly attending the trial court and not more required for the investigation by the NAB authorities, therefore, their ad-interim bail may be confirmed in the similar terms. It has been further stated that out of 17 witnesses, 15 witnesses have already been examined in the subject reference and no useful purpose will be served if the ad-interim bail granted by this court is recalled. In support of his contentions, learned counsel has placed on record the copy of order dated 03.05.2016 passed in C.P No. D-198/2016.

Learned SPP NAB (Sukkur) does not seriously controvert such position, however, he submits that petitioners may be directed to attend the learned trial court regularly without fail.

Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case as elaborated in the order dated 03.05.2016 passed in C.P No. D-198/2016, we are of the opinion that petitioners have not been assigned any substantive role in the reference furnished by NAB authorities regarding commission of alleged offence, therefore, no useful purpose will be served if the ad-interim bail granted to the petitioner vide order dated 11.01.2016 is recalled. Moreover the petitioners have never misused the concession of ad-interim pre-arrest bail during the trial and the trial is almost concluded. Accordingly, ad-interim pre-arrest bail granted to the petitioners vide order 11.01.2016 is confirmed under similar terms as contained in said order. However, the petitioners are directed to attend the trial court regularly without fail, failing which the trial court shall be at liberty to proceed against the petitioners in accordance with law.

Judge

Judge

Abdul Salam/P.A