Re-payment of finance

National Accountability Bureau (NAB) claimed that the funds from the finance facility were diverted to the use of third parties, which was not the purpose of such facility, as such, the accused was liable to be arrested for the purposes of investigation

High Court observed that flow of funds was fully documented and it was unclear how an offense of corruption or dishonesty was made out under the National Accountability Ordinance, 1999, even where a private company had utilized proceeds from a loan in a manner not contemplated at the time of acquisition of such loan, so far as such company was in a position to settle the loan

At best this would amount to a breach of the terms of the finance facility that would empower the bank to declare that a breach of the terms of the loan had taken place and demand that the loan be settled immediately

Accused was admitted to pre-arrest bail, in circumstances.

Ex-Officio Justice of Peace, on application filed by complainant bank, directed police to record statement of complainant and proceed in accordance with law

Grievance of petitioner was that no criminal case could be registered against him

Validity

Jurisdiction was only with Banking Court established under Financial Institutions (Recovery of Finances) Ordinance, 2001, and not before any other court until and unless the same was provided by law, by which financial institution was established

If Legislature had any intention, it could have, at the very beginning formulate or afterwards could amend Financial Institutions (Recovery of Finances) Ordinance, 2001, in such a manner so as to bring the offence within definition of "cognizable" offence

When amendment was not made in Financial Institutions (Recovery of Finances) Ordinance, 2001, Legislators explicitly made their intention clear that with regard to matters between financial institutions and their customers, therefore, such enactment would hold the field and S.489-F, P.P.C. would be applicable to all other persons in general except those covered by Financial Institutions (Recovery of Finances) Ordinance, 2001

Purpose by not amending Financial Institutions (Recovery of Finances) Ordinance, 2001, was that normally in any case of loan from financial institution, loans were protected by mortgage, warranties and covenants with regard to ownership, mortgage, pledge, hypothecation or assignment of or other charges on assets or properties and financial institution could recover the amount by adopting appropriate process under any of such modes

High Court set aside order passed by Ex-Officio Justice of Peace

Petition was allowed accordingly.