0
LAHORE, July 14: The Lahore High Court allowed on Monday the NAB’s plea for separate trial of an accused held in Emirates Bank scam after his extradition from the UAE.
The NAB pleaded the court to order Shahzad Saleem’s trial separately from those already in custody or still absconding so that he could be tried expeditiously.
In this case, Saleem along with Agha Matloob and Shahiduddin Sahaf, are accused of misappropriating Rs280 million funds of Emirates Bank, Kashmir Road branch, Lahore, through fraud.
The accused allegedly forged the signatures of another bank official on a draft and got it encashed subsequently. Later, he absconded to the UAE where he stayed for two years.
The UAE government extradited him on the request of Pakistan government earlier this year. He was arrested by the NAB from Islamabad airport.
Saleem was wanted by Lahore police in an FIR.
BAIL GRANTED: The court allowed bail to three accused in Emirates Bank scam reference.
Shahiduddin Sahaf, Salahudin Sahaf, Tanveer Ahmad Haral had moved the court for grant of bail.
The petitioners took the plea that principal accused Agha Jahanzeb and Asif Sharif had been granted bail by the Supreme Court. The grant of bail to the principal accused had set a precedent also extendable to the rest of the accused in the case.
They pleaded that under the rule of consistency, the court was bound to consider their case for bail on the same footings as considered by the SC.
They pledged not to abscond the proceedings if released on bail.
Additional Advocate-General (AAG) Bilal Khan opposed the petitions arguing that the grounds taken by the SC for granting bail to the two principal accused could not be extended to the petitioners. The NAB had collected sufficient incriminating evidence against the petitioners and their release would be against the norms of justice.
The court, however, upheld the petitioners’ arguments and observed that once the principal accused were allowed bail by the apex court, the case for the grant of bail to the remaining accused could be considered on merit.
DISMISSED: The court dismissed the petition of a NAB accused against his judicial custody.
Khalifa Abdul Qayyum, a former superintendent of Customs, had claimed that he had been in judicial custody since May 27, 2003, and had not been produced before the court since then.
Petitioner’s counsel Javed Shaukat Malik argued that under the NAB Ordinance 1999, no accused could be sent to the jail by the trial court for a period exceeding 15 days. An accused should be produced before the court by the jail authorities concerned after the lapse of this period.
He submitted that following the filing of the reference, Mr Qayyum and other co-accused in the reference were ordered to be sent to jail for a 34-day judicial remand.
The court rejected the argument and observed that the 15-day limit was applicable only in those instances where the reference had not been filed. Once the reference had been put up, the court could send an accused on the judicial custody for a period as deemed fit by it.
