' ABDUL HAMEED DOGAR, C.J.----This petition for leave to appeal is filed against judgment dated 20-11-2007 passed by learned Division Bench of Lahore High Court, Rawalpindi Bench whereby Writ Petition No,962 of 2007 filed by petitioner was dismissed and he was declined concession of bail.
2. Briefly stated, facts giving rise to the filing of instant petition are that Reference No,19 of 2007 was filed by Chairman NAB against petitioner and co-accused. The allegation against them was that they were involved in making of false documents, counterfeiting seal, plates and other instruments for the purpose of pecuniary gain for themselves and corresponding loss to the State exchequer. It was also alleged in the reference that they were also involved in sale and distribution of counterfeit currency i.e, Pakistan Currency, US $ and manufacturing of fake found sterling coins.
2-A. It is mainly contended by Mr. M.A. Zaidi, learned Advocateon-Record appearing on behalf of petitioner that according to the prosecution version offence against petitioner falls under clauses (iv), (ix) and (xii) of section 9(a) of the Ordinance whereas on bare perusal of the said provisions of law it can easily be inferred that section 9(a) of the Ordinance relates to public servants and since petitioner was not a public servant as such the same was misapplied. He further contended that petitioner was arrested on 20-11-2006 by the NAB authorities whereas reference was filed on 4-6- 2007, therefore, there is a lapse on behalf of NAB in filing the reference within stipulated period. He referred to section 24(d) of the Ordinance and contended that an accused cannot be detained for the purpose of inquiry and investigation for a period exceeding ninety days.
3. When confronted with the above, Dr. M. Asghar Rana, learned Addl. Prosecutor General NAB could not controvert the same and contended that the trial could not proceed because some of the accused were absenting themselves from the trial.
4. We have gone through record and noticed that petitioner was arrested on 20-11-2006. And since then he was behind the bar whereas, reference was filed on 4-6-2007. As far as legal position is concerned, reference can be made to provision of section 24(d) of the Ordinance which is reproduced as under:-- "(d) Notwithstanding any Contained in the Code, where the holder of public office or any other person, accused of an offence is arrested by NAB under this Ordinance, NAB shall as soon as may be, inform him of the grounds and substance on the basis of which he has been arrested and produced him before the Court within a period of twenty four hours of arrest excluding the time necessary for the journey from the place of arrest to the Court and such person shall having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, be liable to be detained in the custody of NAB for the purpose of inquiry and investigation for a period not exceeding ninety days and the Court may remand an accused not exceeding fifteen days at a time and for every subsequent remand, the Court shall record reasons in writing copy of which shall be sent to the High Court,"
On perusal of above provision of law, it is clear that a person cannot be detained for the purpose of investigation/inquiry for a period exceeding ninety days and for every remand, reasons have to be recorded. ##TE# Petitioner is in judicial lock up since his arrest i.e, 20-11-2006, whereas, as pointed out by learned Addl. Prosecutor General NAB reference was filed on 4-6-2007 but no progress whatsoever has taken place towards the conclusion of trial. This Court in the case of Asif Sharif v.
Chairman, NAB 2004 SCM R 1805 granted bail to accused against whom the reference was filed after about two years from date of his arrest. It was also held in the case Aga Jehanzeb v. NAB and others 2005. SCMR 1666 that if trial of case is not concluded within 30 days from date of submission of challan, accused would automatically become entitled to grant of bail. This Court has also held in the case of Abdul Qadir v. Federation of Pakistan through Secretary Ministry of Interior, Government of Pakistan and others 2002 SCM R 1478 that conveyance of the grounds and substance on the basis of which the accused is arrested, is the first essential ingredient of section 24(d) of the Ordinance which is mandatory in nature and has to be complied with in letter and spirit as the same is based on constitutionally guaranteed right providing safeguards as to arrest and detention of a person embodied in Article 10 of the Constitution of Pakistan, 1973. Non- compliance of such provisions B of the Constitution and the Ordinance would render the arrest and detention illegal.
5. In view of above discussion, we are of the view that it is a fit case for interference by this Court.
Accordingly, we convert this petition into appeal and allow the same. Appellant Anwarul Haq Qureshi is granted bail, subject to furnishing surety in the sum of Rs,10,00,000 (Rupees ten lac only) with P.R. Bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court.##TE#
6. These are the reasons in support of our short order of even date, which are of tentative nature and shall have no bearing on the merit of the case.