1. ' MRS. YASMIN ABBASEY, J.---This bail application has been preferred by petitioner Rasheedullah Yaqoob in a reference filed against him under No,82 of 2007 with different charges as have been enumerated in the references. According to petitioner the charges as levelled against him in the present reference had already been settled down by him with the NAB Authorities in a previous Reference No,33 of 2001 filed against order, dated 9-3-2006, show that he had entered into a plea bargain agreement with an offer of payment of Rs,437 Millions out of this Rs,37 Millions was already adjusted by the Pakistan Industrial Commercial Leasing Ltd., through Execution No,79 of 2004 in Suit No,77 of 2004, whereas the sum of Rs,400 Millions was agreed to be returned by the petitioner through sale of Frozen Shares in Reference No,33 of 2001 in the name of petitioner Rasheedullah Yaqoob, his relatives, associates and benamidar. Hence eight cases investigated and alleged against this petitioner in the present reference were covered by NAB while entering in the plea bargain and now again cannot be reopened in the present matter.
2. ' It is stated that perusal of reference further reveals that petitioner is not involved directly in the purchase of FIBs and the whole prosecution case rounds against the Accused Nos.1 and 2.
3. ' Bail has also been sought on the ground of illness stating that the petitioner is a heart patient, sick and old person and his confinement will be tantamount to danger to his life. Pre-arrest bail has been granted to the co-accused and this petitioner as a rule of consistency is also entitled for the grant of bail.
4. ' The main emphasis of the learned counsel for petitioner is that he cannot be prosecuted twice for the same offence. Once after plea bargain agreement and payment of amount as settled it becomes a past and closed transaction and petitioner cannot be charged for the same offence again. Referring to the Reference No,33 of 2001 it is argued that in para. 3 allegations of opening a forged account in the name of one Ghulam Razzaq under account No,26956-380 at PCBL is alleged against this petitioner and Muhammad Tahir Siddiqui for the purpose of deposit of amount gained through fraudulent means and withdrawal of the amount for the investment of purchase of PCBL shares in the name of various persons for the ultimate benefit of petitioner Rasheedullah Yaqoob.
5. In the very reference it is alleged that an amount of Rs,23,15,310 Million was earned from the Bank and was transferred on 30-6-1999 in the very above referred account, which subsequently was used by the petitioner and Muhammad Tahir Siddiqui for the purpose other than business of the Bank. Para. 3 of the Reference No,33 of 2001 further clarifies that said reference was filed against illegal, acts said to have been committed by the both above referred persons during year January, 1999 to December, 1999.
6. ' With this detail of Reference No,33 of 2001 learned counsel for petitioner has drawn our attention to the contents of Reference No,82 of 2007 wherein the same allegation of purchase of FIBs of EOBI on 30-1-1999 of the face value of Rs,200 Million and sale of the same to PCBL in total consideration of Rs,213.525 million has been made with addition of withdrawal of differential amount being SBP Cheque without recording any transaction. Statement made by the learned counsel to somehow have strength therein as admittedly the Reference No,33 of 2001 which was settled down through plea bargain for the period from January, 1999 to December, 1999. Very Reference No,33 of 2001 further says separate reference may be filed in respect of the offences committed during the years 1997 and 1998 but the present reference of 82 of 2007 reveals that instead of filing any reference for the offence alleged to have, been committed during years 1997 to 1998 the allegation as have been detailed in the present reference pertain to the very period which has also been disposed of on 9- 3-2006 vide order of Accountability Court No,1 Sindh Karachi.
7. ' So far as denial of opening of account in the fake name of Ghulam Razzaq is concerned although by reading out statement of Shaikh Abdul Razzaq son of Shaikh Abdul Hameed an employee of PCBL as Chief Cashier who had deposed that he never opened any account in PCBL under Account No,26956-3809 in the name of Ghulam Razzaq. However, he admits that this account opening form contains a photocopy of identity card of him, which is clarified by him as, that "he had submitted photocopy of his identity card in Human Resources Department of Prudential Commercial Bank Ltd., Main. Branch, Karachi where he had his personal account in the name of Shaikh Abdul Razzaq, which is his actual name. It appears that someone had obtained photocopy either out of two places and had used it for the opening of account in the fake name of Ghulam Razzaq".
8. ' Learned counsel has also referred a letter of State Bank of Pakistan to prove non-involvement of this petitioner in the offence alleged, in Reference No,82 of 2007 stating that the contents of this whole letter addressed by Deputy Governor R.A. Chughtai of State Bank of Pakistan to Chairman NAB reflects that the name of this petitioner has not been listed in the list of officials who were found involved on the grounds as enumerated in this letter, which has not been specifically denied by the NAB Authorities.
9. ' Learned counsel for the petitioner referring to 161, Cr.P.C. Statement of Zafar Iqbal recorded during investigation has further argued that the statement of P.W. Muhammad Zafar Iqbal who served as AVP Finance and Investment Division is very much material for the assessment of allegations levelled against this petitioner as he too in his statement has not named this petitioner as one of the accomplices in the whole transaction as alleged by the NAB Authorities against him. So also P.
10. Ws. Waseem Abbas the Dealer Foreign Exchange in Atlas Bank in his 161, Cr.P.C. Statement during investigation against Muhammad Tahir Siddiqi and Muhammad Tariq Siddiqi has also not implicated this petitioner in any of the transactions detailed by him.
11. ' In reply to all these arguments learned counsel for NAB have argued that the Reference No,82 of 2007 some of the facts of previous Reference No,33 of 2001 have been made as past history of the petitioner in order to reflect his conduct while serving in PCBL at prominent post as Chairman.
12. ' No doubt that in the present reference some facts have been mentioned with reference to the past conduct of the petitioner as Chairman of PCBL but the arguments advanced by learned counsel for petitioner that the present reference is an outcome of the previous Reference No,33 of 2001, which has already been settled down, has not been satisfactorily replied by learned counsel for NAB rather more he avoided to reply or refute the same. However, during the course of arguments he has placed an application moved by the petitioner to Director-General NAB on 7-1- 2008 along with letter of 13-12-2007 wherein he has requested that without admitting all the allegations and feeling morally obliged to depositors of PIBL he is willing to negotiate plea bargain after considering the terms as laid down in the application but these applications of petitioner until and unless finalized cannot be given any weight because they have been moved all of a sudden during the course of arguments with no notice to the petitioner or his counsel to admit veracity of this document.
13. In view of the above reasoning web are of the view that the petitioner has made' out an arguable case for the grant of bail but still that allegation made in present Reference No,82 of 2007 although may be of year 1999 but somehow is in addition to the allegations made in Reference No,33 of 2001, in connivance of Muhammad Tahir Siddiqi and Muhammad Tariq Siddiqui Ex-Employees of PCBL, which requires further enquiry and investigation as no one can be allowed to misappropriate the public funds. Even otherwise, this is not the only reference filed against this petitioner Rasheedullah Yaqoob beside Reference No,33 of 2001 in Reference No,17 of 2001 he also had admitted to enter into plea bargain. Although by letter, dated 22-32008 for the reasons best know to this petitioner he had withdrawn his letter of 5-3-2008 moved in Reference No,17 of 2001 for entering into plea bargain.
14. ' Considering all these aspects we hereby allow this application of the petitioner on the medical ground taken by him that he is heart patient and old age, subject to the deposit of Rs,8 Million as surety and PR bond in the like amount with the Nazir of this Court.