PESHAWAR, Oct 15: The Peshawar High Court on Monday allowed bail to a registration clerk of National Database and Registration Authority, who is accused of being involved in preparation of national identity cards for Afghan nationals in Mohmand Agency.

A single bench, comprising Justice Khalida Rashid, ordered that the accused-applicant, Jan Mohammad, should be released on furnishing two sureties of Rs100,000 each. Jan Mohammad was arrested on August 24 after the local director of Nadra, Lt-Col Aqeel Ahmad, had lodged a complaint against him to the FIA.

The complainant had alleged that in connivance with some other people, Jan Mohammad put forged signatures of political administration on identity card forms of Afghan nationals in Mohmand agency. It was alleged that about 520 forms carried fake signatures.

Chairman of Free Legal Aid Cell, Noor Alam Khan appeared for the applicant and argued that all the applicants who had submitted their forms had previous identity cards. He contended that the accused-applicant did not have specimen of any of the tribal malik and administration officer with which he could verify the signatures of applicants while receiving it back.

He stated that the applicant was on mobile duty and was not resident of that area, therefore, he was not well aware about the people residing in Mohmand agency. Moreover, Mr Khan argued that no witness had been examined by the authorities which could substantiate their allegations.

Convict Acquitted: Setting aside a judgment of sessions court, the Federal Shariat Court here on Monday acquitted a person, earlier convicted for possessing contraband.

A single bench of the court, comprising Chief Justice Fazal Illahi Khan, ordered that the appellant should be released.

The appellant, Sabz Ali, was arrested on Aug 24, 2000, by the Railway police near Jehangira, Nowshera, when he was travelling in a train. The police reportedly recovered 1.5kgs of charas from a water-cooler he was carrying. He was sentenced to three years imprisonment and fined Rs50,000 by the trial court.

His counsel contended that the prosecution could not prove that the cooler in fact belonged to the appellant.