PESHAWAR: An accountability court here has turned down the bail petition of the prime accused in a high-profile case involving the alleged embezzlement of over Rs37 billion cash in the Upper Kohistan district accounts office.
Judge Mohammad Zafar observed that the plea of Mohammad Riaz, a bank cashier-turned-contractor, was not a fit case for the grant of bail on statutory grounds.
Petitioner Riaz joined the National Bank of Pakistan as cashier in 2006-07 and resigned in 2021.
During his tenure, he served in the bank’s branches in Pattan and Dassu areas. Mr Riaz had allegedly established some construction companies in the name of his six brothers and subsequently on his name after resignation.
Court declares plea ‘not a fit case for grant of bail on statutory grounds’
Following his arrest last year, the accountability court confirmed the freezing of around 40 moveable and immovable properties allegedly belonging to him and his close family members.
The bail petitions of the accused were earlier rejected by the accountability court and the Peshawar High Court last year on merit.
The petitioner again approached the court through the bail petition on statutory grounds, saying he had been arrested by the National Accountability Bureau (NAB) on July 11, 2025, and since then, he had been behind the bars, with the NAB yet to conclude the investigation and file a reference against him.
His counsel contended that he was entitled to bail under Clause A of the Third Proviso of Section 497(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
He argued that under the said provision, the court should release a person on bail if charged for an offence not punishable with death and who had been detained for a continuous period exceeding one year and whose trial had also not concluded.
The lawyer also pointed out that under Section 18(f) of the National Accountability Ordinance, 1999, an inquiry or investigation should be completed within six months, and as the NAB failed to conclude the same rendering proceedings against the petitioner to be null and void.
NAB special prosecutor Manik Shah contended that the bail petitions of the petitioner were earlier rejected by the accountability court and the high court on merit as the accused in light of tentative assessment of the record had been found to be behaving connectivity with the commission of the offence of corruption.
He contended that the provision of Section 497(1) of CrPC was not directly applicable to the proceedings under the National Accountability Ordinance (NAO), 1999, which was a special law having its own scheme for bail, arrest and trial.
The court agreed with most arguments of the special prosecutor and declared that the NAO, 1999, constituted a special law containing its own scheme regarding arrest, bail and trial, and Clause A of the Third Proviso of Section 497(1) of the CrPC was not directly applicable to it.
It added that Section 18(f) of the NAO didn’t prescribe any penal or adverse consequence for failure to conclude the investigation within the stipulated period.
“In the absence of any such consequence, the prescribed time line is to be construed as directive and not mandatory. Therefore, mere delay in the completion of investigation does not by itself invalidate the proceedings,” it declared.
The NAB Khyber Pakhtunkhwa had started an inquiry into the matter last year and during probe it revealed that officials of the communication and works department, Upper Kohistan, in connivance with officials of Upper Kohistan district accounts office and NBP branch there, had misappropriated more than Rs37 billion from different projects through bogus withdrawal of funds from the treasury in the name of several contractors, who didn’t carry out any civil work.
Published in Dawn, October 30th, 2026
