IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PAKISTAN 
(Appellate Jurisdiction) 
 
 
 
 
PRESENT: 
MR. JUSTICE MUSHIR ALAM 
MR. JUSTICE DOST MUHAMMAD KHAN  
 
 
 
Civil Petition No.3874 of 2016 
(On appeal from the judgment dated 
20.10.2016 passed by the Lahore High 
Court, Lahore in W.P No.15848 of 2016) 
 
 
Rai Muhammad Khan 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
… Petitioner(s) 
VERSUS 
NAB thr. its Chairman and others 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
… Respondent(s) 
 
For the petitioner(s): 
Qazi Misbah-ul-Hassan, ASC 
 
 
 
 
Syed Rifaqat Hussain Shah, AOR 
 
For the NAB: 
 
Mr. Nasir Mehmood Mughal, Spl.P.NAB 
 
 
 
 
 
Date of hearing: 
 
22.3.2017 
 
 
 
 
JUDGMENT 
Dost Muhammad Khan, J.— Petitioner is seeking leave to 
appeal against the decision of the Lahore High Court, Lahore dated 
20.10.2016, dismissing his bail petition.  
 
Arguments of Qazi Misbah Ul Hassan, learned ASC for the 
petitioner and also of Mr. Nasir Mehmood Mughal, Special 
Prosecutor, NAB heard in considerable detail and record perused.  
2. 
  
Briefly, the relevant facts are that, petitioner was 
Chairman of the Citizens Community Board (CCB), Sheikhupura, 
when two projects i.e. construction of PCC roads were sanctioned 
by 
the 
Government 
and 
allocated 
Rs.12 
millions, 
while 
contribution of CCB was Rs.3 millions.  
Crl.P.3874/16 
2 
3. 
  
It is alleged in the Reference No.30 of 2016, that the 
petitioner being Chairman, by misusing his status of office, 
misappropriated an amount of Rs.11.04 million out of 12 millions, 
allocated by the Government, through fake and bogus completion 
bills, while in fact no work was done on the site. The amount with 
the endorsement of District Accounts Office, Sheikhupura, was 
first transferred to CCB Account and the petitioner then withdrew 
and deposited in his own account, misappropriating it. 
4. 
  
The DCO of the District, complained to the Chairman, 
NAB, on which, the case was referred to the Local NAB and after 
inquiry and investigation, Reference was filed in the Accountability 
Court.  
5. 
  
Learned counsel for the petitioner argued with 
vehemence that co-accused of the petitioner, namely, Abdul 
Ghafoor, similarly charged, has been granted bail therefore, the 
petitioner is entitled to the same concession on the principle of 
consistence.  
6. 
  
The SOP, issued by the Chairman NAB, that cases 
involving corruption or corrupt practices where an amount is less 
than Rs.100 millions, shall not be taken cognizance by the NAB 
Authorities, has been violated in this case because the Chairman 
was duly authorized to issue such instructions under the 
provisions of NAB Laws, the learned ASC added. 
He also disclosed at the bar that on this issue, the 
jurisdiction of the Accountability Court has been challenged 
through an application and why the trial could not commence 
because it has yet to be decided. Whether such instructions have 
the status of statutory law, binding even on the Chairman because 
in this case he approved the inquiry and investigation into the 
case, is a question to be decided by the Trial Court and we would 
not comment upon this issue anymore, lest it prejudice the case of 
the petitioner.  
Crl.P.3874/16 
3 
7. 
  
Under the principle of law and justice, each bail 
petition is to be decided on its own merits and the law applicable 
thereto, however, this Court cannot remain oblivious of the 
undeniable fact that the tendency of corruption in every field, has 
become a threatening danger to the State economy, striking on its 
roots. The public money, allocated for social sector and economic 
well 
being 
of 
the 
poor 
people, 
is 
consistently 
embezzled/misappropriated at a large scale and why the majority 
of the population is deprived of essential daily utilities, like pure 
drinking water, health care and education facilities, etc. It has 
become the foremost obligation of each and every institution, 
including the Judicator, to arrest this monster at this stage, before 
it goes out of proportion, posing threat to the very survival of the 
State and State economy, therefore, the Courts shall apply the Ani-
Corruption laws somewhat rigidly, once on fact the case is made 
out, at bail stage, against the accused person. Distinction, 
however, is to be drawn between the ordinary criminal cases and is 
of corruption on the above analysis and grounds, while dealing 
with bail matter to an accused person, charged for such like 
crimes and also at the time of conviction, once the case is proved 
against him then, Courts are not supposed to show any mercy by 
taking a lenient view in the matter of sentence.  
8. 
  
So far as the facts of the case are concerned, we have 
carefully gone through the impugned judgment of the High Court, 
which has elaborately dealt with each and every aspect of the case 
while refusing to grant bail to the petitioner and we do not see any 
reason much less plausible to interfere in the impugned order and 
that too in our extraordinary constitutional jurisdiction. Therefore, 
this petition is dismissed and leave to appeal is declined.  
9. 
  
As the accused in every case, has a right of speedy 
trial, therefore, if the Trial Court decides to assume jurisdiction 
after dealing with the objections of the petitioner then, it has to 
proceed with the trial, speedily and to decide the same positively 
within six months under intimation to Additional Registrar 
Crl.P.3874/16 
4 
(Judicial) of this Court. Both, the defence and the prosecution, are 
directed to cooperate with the Trial Court and no unnecessary 
adjournment shall be allowed to anyone of the parties.  
 
These are the detailed reasons for our short order of even 
date, which is reproduced herein below:- 
“For the reasons to be followed, leave is 
declined and petition is dismissed.” 
 
Judge  
 
Judge 
Islamabad, the 
22nd March, 2017  
Nisar/ *  
Approved For Reporting  
