January 11, 2003	Saturday	Ziqa'ad 7, 1423

Please Visit our Sponsor (Ads open in separate window).

ISLAMABAD, Jan 10: The Supreme Court on Friday directed the jail authorities to release Abdul Sattar Dero on bail, who was convicted by an accountability court on corruption charges, after he furnishes bail bond and two sureties of Rs2 million each.

A full bench comprising Justice Munir A Sheikh, Justice Rana Bhagwandas and Justice Syed Deedar Hussain Shah suspended the sentence of the petitioner after accepting Sindh government’s view that the petitioner has already completed his substantive sentence through remissions he earned and also the sentence in lieu of fine. The petitioner has to furnish the bail bonds and sureties to the satisfaction of the registrar of the Sindh High Court.

Sattar has filed the petition against November 19, 2002 judgment of the SHC, praying that under Article 184(3) (fundamental rights) of the Constitution, his custody with the jail authorities be declared unlawful.

The petitioner was convicted by the Accountability Court to seven years of rigorous imprisonment (RI) with a fine of Rs100 million under NAB reference No 16/2002. In default of the fine, the accused has to undergo another two years of RI.

According to the jail authorities the petitioner has already undergone his entire substantive sentence even the sentence in lieu of fine about 10 months before from today after earning remissions which were to be given after the date of his arrest.

The jail authorities had sought permission from the Sindh government whether to release the prisoner or not. The provincial government in return sought the legal advice from Advocate General Sindh on the law point whether the remissions earned were to be calculated from the date of arrest of a convict or from the date of his conviction.

The advocate general rendered the opinion that remissions were to be calculated from the date of arrest and once the same had been granted, it could not be withdrawn subsequently.

The petitioner then made an application before the Division Bench of the SHC where his appeal against his conviction and sentence was still pending.

The bench of the SHC was divided on the question whether the petitioner should be allowed interim bail during the pendency of his appeal. One judge of the bench was of the view that in view of the opinion of the advocate general and the stand taken by the jail authorities, the petitioner was entitled to be released on bail. Whereas the other judge was of the opinion that since the question of the law whether the remissions were to be counted from the date of arrest or conviction recorded by the court was pending, therefore the petitioner should not be granted bail.

Subsequently the chief judge of the SHC referred the matter to a third judge because of the division between the two judges of the bench on the question of the grant of interim bail.