ORDER WITH THE SIGNATURE OF THE JUDGE

For Katcha Peshi.

08.06.2012

Mr. Ameer Raza Naqvi, advocate alongwith Mr. Khaleeq Ahmed and

Mr. Saalim Salaam Ansari, advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Noor Muhammad Dayo, Sr. Prosecutor NAB.

The petitioner, through the instant petition has sought the following reliefs:-

i. Admit the petitioner to bail upon furnishing solvent surety with the satisfaction of this Hon’ble Court as the entire proceedings against the petitioner are based on mala-fide, ill intent, malicious designs, and an attempt to humiliate.

ii. May exercise its discretion under section 561-A Cr.P.C. and quashed the proceedings against the petitioner.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submit that the petitioner shall be satisfied if he is enlarged on bail at this stage.

The brief facts of the case are that an FIR was registered against the petitioner and others for indulging in fraudulent claims of Sales Tax Refund in violation of sections 2(37), 23, 26, recoverable under section 36(1) punishable under section 33(11), (a & c), (13), (18) & (19) read with SRO 575(1)/2002 dated 31.8.2002 of the Sales Tax Act, 1990, interim challan was submitted before the trial Court however, the petitioner was not sent up for trial and his name was accordingly mentioned in the interim challan. The interim challan further reveals that M/s. Malik International, a proprietary concern of the petitioner, is a genuine bona-fide exporter and Sales Tax Refund claimed by them against the invoices of M/s. Uni Leather International (Kasur) has already been adjusted by Collectorate of Sales Tax (Enforcement) Karachi vide RPO No. 27244/2004 dated 11.11.2004 and that no Sales Tax Refund has been claimed by / paid to M/s. Malik International against the invoices of M/s. Fortune Apparel Industries (Kasur) and that no Sales Tax liability was outstanding against them. It was in respect of M/s. Uni Leather International and M/s. Fortunate Apparel Industries that the allegations were made against the present petitioner, however, subsequently the case was transferred to NAB. The NAB itself conducted investigation afresh. However in the reference ultimately submitted by NAB before the Administrative Judge, Accountability Courts Sindh at Karachi, name of the petitioner was cited as an accused at serial No. 13.

We have, with the assistance of the counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Prosecutor NAB, perused the contents of the reference however, except in para 12 and title of the reference, there is absolutely no mention of the petitioner in the entire reference. Para 12 of the reference clearly states that the investigation report reveals that no incriminating evidence has been found against the petitioner.

Learned Prosecutor NAB in his opposition to the request for bail has not been able to say anything more than the fact that cognizance in the case against the petitioner has been taken by the trial court by issuing warrants against him as a result whereof he is behind the bars and submits that petitioner is therefore not entitled to bail.

The argument seems to be preposterous, as in the facts and circumstances of the case, we cannot hold ourselves from admitting the petitioner to bail. The petitioner is therefore granted bail subject to his furnishing surety in the sum of Rs.500,000/= and PR bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Nazir of this Court.

At this stage Mr. Ameer Raza Naqvi, learned counsel for the petitioner requests that it may be observed that the petitioner shall be at liberty to seek quashment of the proceedings at an appropriate stage. We would, therefore, observe that the petitioner is at liberty to move for quashment of the proceedings, if so advised.

The petition, alongwith the pending applications, stands disposed of in the foregoing terms.

ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE

J U D G E

DB.Mr.Justice Maqbool Baqar & Mr.Justice Aqeel A. Abbasy\08.6.2012\zahid