This
is an unopposed application for bail.
The
brief facts of this case are that the applicant is employed by the National University
of Science and Technology..., as a principal accountant. His duties, inter
alia, were to compile salary and allowance schedules, and paying employees.
During his employment, he drafted a payroll of non-existent workers, and
re-introduced employees who had resigned from the institution. In addition,
therefore, he would inflate salary grades of some employees, but, on payment,
employees received their normal or actual salaries while he pocketed the
difference. With regards to the non-existent employees, he would then draw
their salaries.
As
a result of this scam, his employer suffered actual prejudice in the amount of
US$18,947=.
In
casu, the applicant is facing very serious allegations of fraud which has been
carried out after careful, and precision, planning.
The
State has an audit report as proof of the commission of the offence, and copies
of payroll sheets bearing the applicant's signature. This, to me, is evidence
of a prima facie case against him. In saying so, I have not lost sight of the fact
that, at this stage, these are mere allegations.
The
question that falls for determination is whether or not the applicant is likely
to stand trial if granted bail.
In
my view, the applicant is involved in a serious case of fraud where the State
has overwhelming evidence against him. If convicted, he is likely to be
imprisoned for a very long time.
In
light of the above, he has every reason to abscond in order to avoid the rigours
of prison life. If this happens, the interests of justice would have been
defeated.
It
is for that reason that the applicant's application should not succeed.
This application is accordingly dismissed.
