1985 PLP 1936 (SCMR)

ASLAM RIAZ HUSSAIN, J.‑‑Mian Muhammad Abdullah petitioner seeks leave to appeal against the order of the Lahore High Court dated 18‑3‑1985.

2. We issued notice to the Advocate‑General and the official Liquidator and after hearing the learned counsel for the parties we convert the petition into appeal and proceed to dispose it of as such.

3. Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that Muhammad Abdullah petitioner was the Managing Director of a defunct Finance Company. The matter of the said Company is being examined by a learned Company Judge in the Lahore High Court. According to the official Liquidator the liability against the petitioner stood at about Rs.25 lacs. The learned Company Judge directed the petitioner to furnish adequate security in the sum of Rs.15 lacs to the satisfaction of the Deputy Registrar (Judicial) of that Court and also to deposit his International Passport. The petitioner deposited his passport but was unable to furnish the security as directed by the learned Company Judge and instead moved a civil miscellaneous application for review of the said order requiring furnishing the security, which was dismissed on 6‑3‑1985 for want of prosecution, as he did not appear in Court on that date. A D.S.P. of the F.I.A. was deputed to serve notice on him and ultimately non‑bailable warrants were issued against him and he was finally arrested by the F.I.A. The petitioner applied for bail which was granted to him by the learned Judge of the High Court in the sum of Rs.25 lacs with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Deputy Registrar (Judicial) of that Court.

4. Through the present appeal he seeks only reduction in the amount of security.

5. It was submitted on his behalf that although bail was granted to him by the High Court vide the impugned order in the month of March, 1985, it is now the month of June, he has not been able to arrange his bail because nobody is forthcoming to give surety for him for such a heavy amount. It was pointed out to him that the amount involved in the case was itself very high and the Court allowed bail on furnishing of sureties in heavy amounts with a view to safeguard the interest of the Bank/Company. The petitioner's counsel submitted that the interest of the Company can be secured even if the amount of surety is reduced but the number of sureties is enlarged. 6: We asked the official Liquidator whether the company would be satisfied if the amount of bail was reduced to Rs. 5 lacs and the number of sureties is Increased to. He submitted that this would satisfy the bank. The learned Additional Advocate‑General also agreed.

7. In this view of the matter we allow the appeal, reduce the amount of bail from Rs.25 lacs to Rs.5 lacs and direct that the petitioner shall be released on bail on furnishing bail bond in the sum of Rs.5 lacs with sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of Deputy Registrar (Judicial) of the Lahore High Court. M. I. Appeal allowed.