Syed Nasir Abbas (Petitioner) VS NAB and Ors (Respondent)

80a

II\I THtr HIGE{ C$U}tT OF Strl':tr}H, It^Fr.RACHtr Before;- IMr. .Itrstice Atrrned Ali \'i. Shaikh, C.J. Mr. Justice lVloliarurnerd iiarirn Khan Agha, J Petitien number. narne cf the petitiouer a ndh is counsel. C.P. No.D-6736 ol20i7 Srled Nasir Abbas V. The Chairn'rarr NAB & others.

Syed Nasir Abbas S/o Syed Alamdar fh.is;sain (pet-itione:) Through Mr. Aarnir Raza Naqvi, Advocale.

Counsel_ fo_r _Lt!e R e s pgn{enlLg

Mr. Yasir Siddiqrr.i, Special Prosecul-or, i'iAB Date of hearing: 09.03.2018

Date of order: i6.03.2018

ORDEfi Mohanarna.d l{ari m Khan Aeha, J: 85' this order 11:e Propose to dispose of the above mentionecl petition filed by the I petitioner (Syeci Nasir Abbas) for post a.rrest baiJ'

2.'lhe brief facts of the case are tilai. th.e petrtion'ei' alongrvith co-accused Syeci Ubairi Ailnre'''i "rrlto is in jucliciaJ 'u,ere allegedly involved ip iilegall;r renting'oirt Karachi ",-,"r1.,, Development Authority (KDA) amenit-,, piots /p,orzet'nrnerrt land for the 1:urpose of commerciai activities i.e. rna-rriage halls, petrol pumps, etc which \,vere reserved for a-Inenity purposes as per Master Plan. The detail of said amenity plots are as under:-

(a). ST- i'2, Biocii 5, Scheir'-',r ') eL reserved for Playground.

(b). Green Belt Block 3, Sha.h Iraisal Tovln Townstiip (1000 Sc1, yds).

O. ST-5, Rlock i5, Scherne 36.l, reserved' for Car Parking. ,,)

e-- 8az (d). ST-8, Block 14, Scheme 36, resenred for Playground.

(e)Green Belt, Block-2, Shah Faisal Town Township (1s00 Sq. yds).

(0.ST-7/A, Federai. B. Area, reserved for Cinema' t 3. That at the time of allotment some of which were approved by the petitioner in his capaciry as Director General KDA it rvas against the rules and regulation; for amenity plots to be used for any other purpose.

4.That by misusing his authority and/or failing to exercise his authority the petitioner approved allotment of amenity plots on rent for commercial use in violation of the relevant rules r,vhich caused undue favour to the beneficiar5' allottees and caused colossal loss to the KDA' It is also h alleged that the allotment of non-amenity plots were also made without open auction which caused heayy loss to the government / KDA exchequer. The ditference of market value and amount received by KDA througtr illegal and uniawful allotment is set out in the table under para 6 of the reference which is not reproduced in this order but may be found in the reference. Thus on account of this mlsuse of authority/failure to exercise authority by the petitioner and the other co- the accused which caused a loss to KDA/national exchequer National Accountability Bureau (NAB) filed a reference against the petitioner and his co-accused for corruption.and corrupt practices under section 9 of the Nlational Accountability Ordinance, lggg (NAO) on 23-O2-2O|B before the accountability courts at Karachi' l.l

---.."..--.:---J---a-

80tt

5.Learnecl counsel for the Pt)titiort'::r sltbmitred that- the petitioner is completeiy innocent of irn3' ivroirg doing; that he had not been involved in the renting out of any amenity plots for commercial activities; that in any er,'ent there was no rule which provides that amenity ptots carrnot be 'let out for commercial purposes and in this respect he placed reliance on KDA Resolution No.207 in minutes of the 24tt' meeting of the Governing bocly of the KDA dated 14-09-1965. He further submitted that the petitioner had been unnecessarily hunriliated by the NAB as he rvas arrested on 13.1O.2OI7 from his office which was given p.ruii"ity'in the electronic media. For all the above reasons he submitted that the petitioner was entitled to be reieased on post arrest bail'

6.On the other hand', tearued Special Frosecutor NAB submitted that there was sulTicient nraterial 0n record to connect the petitioner with the offence ior rvhich he had been chargecl ahd as such the petitioner's petition for post arrest bail should be dismissed. In this connection he took the court through a number of relevant documents'and S'161 Cr'PC st-aternents

7 We have considered the argulnetrts of the' parties ancl gone throllgh the l'ecord rn'ith their able assistance' We rr,,ou1d like to malie it clear Lhat the findings in this

B.

the material order are only based on a tentarive assessment of available on record and shall have,no bearing on the trial

rvhich shali be riecided on nrerits basecl on the evidence plar:ecl befbre the trial t'" "ot ,.,

8os

g. With regard to the petitioner since he is a Gcvernment official we have also taken into consideration that he is paid and emplo)red to serve the State/Province out of tax payers money and has a special fiduciary duty to protect, safe guard and ensure that the tax Pa)'ers property is utilized to its best

I

effect and legally and that tax payers money is rvell spent and not squanderecl needlessly or misappropriated through corruption in performing his duties/functions.

10.We have also taken into account that in offences of corruption chargeii under NAO (rvhire coilar.crime) the Hon'ble Supreme Court of Pakista-n in the recent case of Rai ilIuhammad Khan v. NAB QAIT SCMR 1152) has emphasized that the grant of bail in such cases must be construed strictly and rigidly and rve have accordingly applied this approach in this case.

1 1. Since this is the post arrest bail iLage we vvould not like to comnient on any humiliation which may have been caused to the petitioner on account of his arrest instead we will focus on the material on i'ecord to see if it connects him to ,tfre offenseforwhichhehasbeenchargerlespeciallyasNABhave the the power of arrest after an inquiry is auttrorized provided proper prqcedure is follou'ed and it is difficult if not unlawful a for NAB to impede the freedorn of the media' 'at the time of the

1)The petiticller was not a narve novlce

offense rather he 'd/as a venr settior and exPerienced es go\rernment officer rn'tlo at the tiirre of offence wa€i -sefl'zlng Directc:r General KDA

80L

13.S.2(2) of the KDA ($incih Amencit:rent ) Ordinance i994 makes it cieai' that iro amenity piot reserred for'the puipose mentioned in the clause shall be converted to or uiilized for any other purpose. Like n'ise the Sindh Disposal of Urban Land Ordinance 2OO2 ar S;1O 12i makes it ciear that no

I'

amenitv piot czui be converteci tc or Lrtilized fcrr any other- purpose other than the purpose ior -which it is reserved' Thus, no amenit-r' plot can be iet oul ltrr commercial purposes' Thus, if the petitioner let out any amenity plot of the KDA for commefc:i6.1 purposes he rvould have misused his authori(y irr order to favour/benefit others and where the letting was not at a market value caused loss to tiie l(DA. As DG KDA it beggars belief that he was llnar^rare of this law i.e. amenity piots cannot be used for commerciid pui'pose.s which most ) citizens ci'Karachi are aware of clue to the widespread iilegal encroachment and china cutting of Clcverirment land' Ihe Hon'ble supreme court has recentlSr ta-ken uotice of this illegal phenomen<;n and ,lrdered the (leniolition of sr'rch itt':gal constructions. The Resolution which the petitioner reiies on is completeiy- irrelevant as it relales to setting up of an enforcement cell :n I(DA

14.'[ne S i51 ::taiemei:ts r:f 'l'ar-rflq A]'trrecl So'otnro' 'Jainee !

Baloch,S-\'clclAttaAbbass:utdS1'eclM.r-rir:rrrrnt:rlseirar:it:"rt'i;-" ,show ii-lt; iiiegal a-crioi:-s r'f r.iri: i-ri:til'ionel'iti rr:r:ting r;i-lt

r'h;',1 rire afireriiil, rit.rr'.lOSf iat:,,i ftrr a:i;l.rii:.,'-::'li2t;-'r:i1lcs::;': all':J an petitior]e,r r;t,it-s ij1','i.ri'rgc1 i;'i thc- samt: iiij.r L"'4"'i'. zii'sc 'tl':fri aptll.lcnr-i,ii;,1ii.le',ifl-i-(:'r-')\ti'7b.v;i1"fl."i1r'iraiiir.)r:r-il:':ir'1-r'

g01

the petition(1i: ro aliot aarerury iand foi- cornmercial use on which the petrtioner has i.-rrar"ked "pltt up"

15.More signiflcantly we harze been shown a note sheet which reflects that the application regarding tempclrary use of I the land sT-S for opening Marriage Hall on the abbve plot for five years which v/as approved by the petitioner. This plot is an amenity plot and it is found in paragraph 2 O of the reference sT-S Biock 15, Scheme 36, reserved for car Parking u,hich was approved by the petitioner for aofnrnefcial purposes on 24.10.2016 and bears the petitioner's signature which has not been disputed. Likewise we have been shown another note sheet which contains application for temporary use for petrol pump which reiates to Green Belt Block 3 Shah Faisal Town TorvnShip {1000 Sq' yds) v'rhich again has been approved under the petitioner's signature on 05.06.2017. Again this was an amenity plot which is referred to in the reference at para 2 (b). Yet another note sheet where the appiicant has applied to put up d marriage halilmarquee lawn in respect of land at 2 (d) in the reference dated 4/512015 is approved under the signature of the petitioner' All this land rvas amenity land and coulci not have been'usect for commercial purPoses. In acldition the table under Para of the reference reveals that not only w-as the petitioner

. I '-

illegaily letting out such amenity plot land for commerctal rates purposes but he was also ctrarging rent at throwaway loss to as opposed to the ma:'ket rate r'vhich caused a great the KDA/exchecluei: and gave 1ui'ther beneiit to the iliegai

allottees. , _, l-. tl

I

8C8

16.It was the responsibility, duty and obli8ation, "l- !h: petitioner to ensure that the amenity plots rvere used for their allocated purposes e.g. parks, play grounds, , sqhgols: hospitals, mosques etc which was to bene{it the publ-ic in the I area. Instead the petitioner completely betrayed the tnrst oi the people and illegally by misusing his authority let out such amenity plots for commercial purposes which deprived the pubiic of valuable and vital faciiities such as the aforementioned parks, play grounds, schools, hospitals, Mosques etc. The petitioner illegatly misused his authority in cornplete disregard of th.e welfare of the people in favor of commercial interests.

17.Thus, after taking into consideration the material , discussed above \,ve are of the considered vieu' that there is prima facie sufficient material available on record to connect the petitiorier to the offence for which.he has been charged in the reference and as such his pe"'ition for post anrest bail is dismissed

18.The above petition stands disposed of in the above terms

E/,

CEY.IEFh,US TICE {r

,.8.*!rF-o--ntrsi'dr.1r.*ttir.'t*t t rurrrc"idmtax &lrt