2021 PLP 871 (SCMR)
TARIQ AHMED and others — Petitioners Versus NATIONAL ACCOUNTABILITY BUREAU through Chairman and others — Respondents
| Citation | 2021 PLP 871 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | Supreme Court of Pakistan |
| Bench Members | Mushir Alam, Yahya Afridi and Qazi Muhammad Amin Ahmed, JJ |
| Parties | TARIQ AHMED and others — Petitioners Versus NATIONAL ACCOUNTABILITY BUREAU through Chairman and others — Respondents |
| Primary Law | National Accountability Ordinance (XVIII of 1999) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2021 PLP 871 (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: National Accountability Ordinance (XVIII of 1999) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2021 PLP 871 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Supreme Court of Pakistan bench comprising: Mushir Alam, Yahya Afridi and Qazi Muhammad Amin Ahmed, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2021 PLP 871 (SCMR) (TARIQ AHMED and others — Petitioners Versus NATIONAL ACCOUNTABILITY BUREAU through Chairman and others — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Shah Khawar, Advocate Supreme Court and Mehmood A. Sh, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioners (in C.Ps. Nos. 1017-1020/2021).
- Zulfikar Khalid Maluka, Advocate Supreme Court for Petitioners (in C.Ps. Nos. 1077-1084, 1095-1102, 1123-1146, 1278-1282/2021).
- Mukesh Kumar G. Karara, Advocate Supreme Court and M. Kassim Mirjat, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioners (in C.Ps. Nos. 1085-1091, 1093-1094/2021).
- Malik Mumtaz Hussain Jai, Advocate Supreme Court and Mehmood A. Sh, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioners (in C.Ps. Nos. 1283-1288/2021).
- Ms. Abida Parveen Channar, Advocate Supreme Court/Advocate-on-Record for Petitioners (in C.P. 442-K/2021 and C.M.A..418-K/21).
Headnotes / Summary
(Against the order dated 02.03.2021 in Constitutional Petition D-299/2017, order dated 10.3.2021 in Constitutional Petitions Nos. D-599, 546/2019, 4740, 4423/2016, 543, 537/2019, 1262/2020, 443/2018, 541/2019, 3067/2016, 569/2019, 528/2018, 944/2019, 541/2018, 493/2018, 472/2018, 923/2018, 473/2018, 497/2018, 460/2018, 644/2018, 627/2018, 474/2018, 423/2018, 1203/2018, 728/2018, 1593/2018, 626/2018, 624/2018, 522/2018, 516/2018, 527/2018, 665/2018, 573/2018, 492/2018, 625/2018, 568/2019, 314/2019, 520/2018, 770/2018, 1376/2019, order dated 17.3.2021 passed in Constitutional Petitions D-1175/2020, 1160/2020, 1243/2020, 1168/2020, 1162/2020, 966/2020, 1157/2020 and order dated 16.3.2018 passed in Const.
S. 9
Constitution of Pakistan, Art. 199
Corruption and corrupt practices
Petitioners, who were arrayed as accused persons in different National Accountability Bureau (NAB) references, were admitted to bails, both anticipatory as well as post arrest by the High Court in different Constitutional petitions, allowed in lieu of deposit of amounts allegedly embezzled by the each petitioner
Supreme Court observed that such wholesale treatment of motions seeking bails, pre-arrest as well as post arrest, in an omnibus manner, in isolation to the distinct facts and circumstances of each case as well as different legal regimes applicable thereto, could not be approved
Petitions for leave to appeal were converted into appeals and allowed; impugned orders of the High Court were set-aside and bail petitions filed by the petitioners before the High Court of Sindh were remitted with the directions that the same shall be deemed as pending for decisions afresh, and the petitioners on pre-arrest bail shall remain on ad-interim bail and they were to be notified by the Court for their appearance. Abdus Sattar Awan, Special Prosecutor, NAB, M. Hasan Akbar, Additional Prosecutor General, NAB for the NAB (in all cases).
Judgment & Decree
QAZI MUHAMMAD AMIN AHMED, J.
The petitioners are arrayed as accused in different NAB references; they were admitted to bails, both anticipatory as well as post arrest by a learned Division Bench of High Court of Sindh at Sukkur in different Constitution Petitions, allowed on different dates in lieu of deposit of amounts allegedly embezzled by the each petitioner, vires whereof are being assailed. With unanimity it is argued that not only the stipulated condition is alien to law but also virtually tantamount to denial of relief that too foreclosing further avenues for the petitioners. The learned Additional Prosecutor General NAB has assailed the impugned orders as well and with reasons more than one. According to the learned Law Officer, there existed irrefutable overwhelming evidence, documentary in nature, n each case that prima facie framed the accused with the impugned transactions heavily incurring upon the exchequer; he has further argued that in the absence of any element of mala fide there was no occasion for the learned Division Bench to extend judicial protection to the accused merely upon realization of embezzled amounts.
2. Heard.
3. Be that as it may, a wholesale treatment of motions seeking bails, pre-arrest as well as post arrest, in an omnibus manner, in isolation to the distinct facts and circumstances of each case as well as different legal regimes applicable thereto, fails to commend our approval. Exasperating delay in disposal of some of the petitions has also been viewed by us with disquiet, as it appears to have obstructed the investigative process by unnecessarily placing the prosecution in a disadvantageous position; it is equally discomforting to a claimant who justifiably seeks judicial protection. Petitions are converted into appeals and allowed; orders impugned are set aside. Bail petitions filed by the appellants before the High Court of Sindh are remitted and shall be deemed as pending for decisions afresh; Accused on pre-arrest bail shall be notified by the Court for their appearance and remain on ad-interim bail upon furnishing bonds in the sum of Rs.500,000/- with one surety each in the like amount to the satisfaction of Deputy Registrar (Judicial) of Sukkur Bench before the month is out. It is expected that the petitions shall be decided/disposed of with all convenient dispatch on their own merits having regard to the law declared by this Court in the case of Talat Ishaq v. National Accountability Bureau (PLD 2019 Supreme Court 12). MWA/T-2/SC Petitions allowed.