Sindh High Court irked by ‘frivolous appeal’ filed by NAB

The Sindh High Court has dismissed an appeal filed by the National Accountability Bureau (NAB) against acquittal of the Karachi International Container Terminal (KICT) in a case pertaining to illegal allotment of state land.

NAB had filed appeal against the KICT’s acquittal by an accountability court in a corruption case about loss to the national exchequer to the tune of Rs21.45 billion. A NAB prosecutor submitted that the KICT was also arrayed as an accused in the reference through its chief executive officer only for the recovery of a liability wherein it had come on record that the land in question was allotted to the respondent without due process of the law.

NAB requested the high court to set aside the trial court order with regard to the acquittal of the KICT. A division bench of the SHC headed by Justice Mohammad Junaid Ghaffar after perusal of the appeal observed that the KICT was not an individual but a limited liability company whereas it had been arrayed as accused through the CEO without naming him only for the recovery of alleged liability.

The SHC observed that NAB contended that the company must remain as accused in the reference for the recovery of liability. The bench observed that the company by itself could not be made as accused in the reference until officers of the company were made accused which had already been done.

The high court observed that it had come on record that the KICT had been arrayed as a beneficiary accused for purpose of the recovery of liability and the trial court was justified for exercising powers under the section 265-D CrPC for discharging the respondent as no criminal role had been shown in reference against the respondent.

The SHC observed that there were other provisions of the NAB ordinance which could be invoked in respect of assets of the respondent. The high court also noticed that NAB time and again had filed appeals without proper appreciation of material as well as law and in every run of the mill case, appeal was filed.

The high court warned NAB that in the future, if such frivolous acquittal appeal was filed, the court would be compelled to impose exemplary cost on NAB authorities. The SHC also dismissed NAB appeal in limine as being misconceived.

It is pertinent to mention that NAB had accorded approval of filing references against various Karachi Port Trust officials including former chairman and KICT for illegally allotting state land causing Rs 21.45 billion losses to the national exchequer.

Rape case appeal

The Sindh High Court has dismissed the appeal of a convict against his life imprisonment sentence in a rape case. Appellant Mohammad Bilal was sentenced to life in prison by an additional district and sessions court of District Central for raping a girl. According to the prosecution, the man was booked after raped the girl, who became pregnant and later gave birth to a boy.

The appellant’s counsel submitted that his client was falsely involved in the case by the complainant only to pressurise him to marry her, and an FIR was lodged after a delay of eight months. He stated that there was no eyewitness to the incident, the DNA report was a managed one, and the evidence of the prosecution witnesses were inconsistence and doubtful, which could not be relied upon for convicting the appellant.

The deputy prosecutor general supported the trial court order and requested the court to dismiss the appeal. A single bench, headed by Justice Irshad Ali Shah, after hearing the arguments and perusal of the evidence, observed that the complainant had deposed that after divorce she was residing with her parents and the appellant subjected her to rape under deception that he would marry her.

The court observed that the delay in the registration of the FIR was not appearing to be fatal for the reason that it was the appellant who kept the victim on false hopes and promises to marry her.

It further observed that after the registration of the FIR the complainant gave birth to a baby boy and on DNA examination the appellant was found to be his biological father, which prima facie suggests that the appellant had subjected the complainant to rape.

The court said that the complainant herself was an eyewitness to the incident and apparently she was having no reason to have involved the appellant in this case falsely, as he was her cousin.

The court observed that there appears no inconsistency between evidence of the complainant and her witnesses on merits of the case and it would be safe to conclude that the prosecution has been able to prove its case against the appellant beyond shadow of doubt.

The court observed that no case is made out for making interference with the impugned judgment and dismissed the appeal of convict maintaining the life imprisonment sentence of appellant.