' MEHMOOD MAQBOOL BAJWA, J. --- The petitioner was tried in ACR No, 69 of 2008 submitted under Section 9(a)(iii)(vi) & (xii) read with Section 10-A of National Accountability Ordinance, 1999 by the Chairman NAB on the charge of misappropriation of Rs, 5,56,61,640/- to the Government Department, committing forgery for the purpose of cheating, using forged documents. After conclusion of the trial, the learned Judge, Accountability Court-II, Lahore vide judgment dated 02.04.2013 convicted the petitioner under Section 10-A of National Accountability Ordinance, 1999 and was awarded sentenced to seven years' (R.I.) along with fine of Rs, 10 Million. Benefit of Section 382-B of Cr.P.C. Was also extended to him. Feeling aggrieved, the petitioner preferred Criminal Appeal No, 572 of 2013 which was admitted to regular hearing on 15.7.2013.
2. The petitioner has filed present Writ Petition No, 10987 of 2013, seeking suspension of his sentence and admitting him to bail, pending disposal of his criminal appeal.
3. Precise allegation against the petitioner is that he . While posted as Accounts Officer in the office of Controller of Military Accounts, Rawalpindi, misappropriated the ,the ques by causing loss of Rs, 5,56,61,640/- to the public exchequer, committing forgery for the purpose of cheating, using forged documents as genuine and framing an incorrect official record.
4. It has been contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that he has been falsely involved in this case; that the learned Trial Court has failed to appreciate the essential element of crime i,e, mens rea which is totally missing; that it was the prosecution own case that no independent linkage between the petitioner and the principal co-accused (since Proclaimed Offender) could be established nor the delivery of the cheques in question; that the judgment of the learned Trial Court is based on presumptions, surmises and conjectures; that nothing incriminating material is available on record to connect him with the commission of alleged offence and as such the petitioner is entitled to bail.
5. On the other hand, learned Law Officer has vehemently opposed the petition by stating that the petitioner being holder of public office and in collusion with his co-accused, namely, Saeed Ahmad, misused his authority so as to gain benefit for himself and for his co-accused; that fake and forged cheques were prepared and the same were fraudulently used as genuine and amount Rs, 5,56,61,640/-was drawn from the banks and as such Government funds were misappropriated, therefore, the petitioner is not entitled to any concession.
6. We have heard the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the record.
7. The petitioner was convicted under Section 10- A of National Accountability Ordinance, 1999 and sentenced to suffer seven years' (R.I.) and to pay a fine of Rs, 10 Million. The petitioner was duly named in the reference and the role assigned to the petitioner is of preparing fake and forged cheques and same were fraudulently and dishonestly used as genuine and an amount of Rs, 5,56,61,640/- was drawn from the Bank. We are not inclined to express anything on merits of the case. The grounds urged by the learned counsel for the petitioner touch merits of the appeal and requires deeper appreciation of evidence which cannot be gone into at this stage.
8. Consequently, this petition being without any merits is hereby dism issed.