Court reserves judgment on bail plea

Petitioner’s counsel gives health, legal reasons for bail grant.

KARACHI: An accused, Muhammad Zafar Maniar, arrested for a housing scheme fraud case, filed a petition in the Sindh High Court (SHC) seeking bail and citing National Accountability Bureau (NAB) investigation officer (IO) and NAB director-general as respondents.

During the petition’s hearing on Tuesday, the judgment was reserved by an SHC division bench in the bail plea by the promoter of the Sachal Sarmast Town project 31 years ago, allottees of which are still awaiting allotments or return of their money.

The division bench, comprising Justice Shahid Anwar Bajwa and Justice Tufail H Ebrahim, earlier heard the counsel for the applicant and arrested accused Maniar. The petitioner’s counsel advocate Rana M Shamim submitted that the entire record of the project/housing scheme was provided to the bureau as directed by NAB investigating officer (IO) Shahzad Ahmed. Therefore, no tampering of record is apprehended, he added.

The counsel also stated that his client should be granted bail on health grounds, submitting records from National Institute of Cardiovascular Diseases (NICVD) and other hospitals according to which the accused was a heart patient and needed “coronary angiography”.

Maniar is 62 years old and his case does not fall under the prohibitory clause - meaning that the offences are bailable - and therefore he may be admitted to bail, the counsel pleaded. The counsel also submitted a folder containing all the details about plots in the project, extending over 114 acres of land.

The document says that the total number of plots leased is 960, defaulted plots (default in payment by allottees) are 173, while the number of plots cancelled because legal and government dues were not paid are 1,009. Seventy-eight allottees had their money refunded, according to the document.

Meanwhile, NAB’s counsel advocate Ashraf Butt opposed the bail on a number of grounds. He said that the accused defrauded poor people who deposited their hard-earned money to get a plot 31 years ago and since then are “longing for plots”. They were denied the right to own a plot on one pretext or another, Butt submitted.

Relying on a letter and the request for plea bargain by the accused, he said the request for plea bargain was under process as “safeguarding the interest of poor allottees is of prime importance.”

The bench, after hearing detailed arguments from both sides, reserved its judgment.

Published in The Express Tribune, December 1^st, 2010.