NAB files review petition against SC's dismissal of reopening Hudaibiya mills case

National Accountability Bureau (NAB) has filed a review petition against Supreme Court’s (SC) dismissal of NAB’s plea to reopen Hudaibiya Mills case against the Sharif family.

The country’s top graft buster has been pursuing Hudaibiya Mills case and trying to reopen but to no avail. SC’s dismissal of the reopening plea led to the filing of a review petition against the verdict in a case against Sharif family.

SC announced that Hudaibiya Mills case – known as the mother of all corruption cases against Sharifs – is not maintainable.

‘Dar misled Nawaz Sharif on economic issues’

The top court’s three-member bench – comprising Justice Mushir Alam, Justice Qazi Faez Isa and Justice Mazhar Alam Khan Miankhel – rejected NAB’s appeal against the order of a divisional bench of the Lahore High Court (LHC),  which in 2014 had quashed the graft reference.

Review Petition

Petition states that SC discarded the statement of Ishaq Dar on wrong premises as it was recorded before learned Magistrate after grant of pardon, by Chairman NAB; as required under section 26 NAO1999, as per prevailing practice of recording of statement of approver before Magistrate even in ordinary criminal cases, although not required by specific provision of Cr.P.C.

“The reference to Sec 26(e) of NAO in paragraph No. 29 of the judgment under review may be reconsidered for the reasons that; Sec 26 of NAO 1999 contains two part; the first part of sec 26 (a) (b) of NAO 1999, pertains to tender of the pardon by Chairman NAB and recording the statement before him. The second part i.e Sec 26 (d) (e) of NAO 1999 pertains to examination of approver during trial and in case of resiling from conditions of pardon, the proceeding against approver at subsequent trial,” the petition states.

That in the original text of Ordinance XVIII of 1999, National Accountability Bureau Ordinance 1999, pardon was / is completed within Section 26(a) of NAO 1999 , whereas after the amendment made on 05-07-2000 by virtue of Ordinance XXIV of 2000 pardon is/was completed within Section 26(a)(b) of NAO 1999.(Clause (c) would not be relevant in the instant case), the petition argued.

How international media covered Nawaz Sharif’s disqualification

Rest of the clauses of Section 26 (d) (e) have no nexus with the grant of pardon and would come into play; if a witness resile from his disclosure made to the Chairman NAB, hence this important provision of law has been overlooked in the judgment under review and on the contrary the wrong interpretation on the subject has been endorsed and approved by this Hon’ble Court which is an error floating on the surface of the judgment which needs to be rectified.

It is submitted that keeping the Reference 5 of 2000, adjourned Sine Die was a collusive arrangement of PPP, PML-N and regime of General Pervez Musharraf. This was the reason that the NAB authorities did not show interest in prosecution of Reference No. 5 of 2000.

Due to these circumstances it could not be said that after 2007, the regime of General Pervez Musharraf or of the PPP are inimical towards PML-N rather they were instrumental in bringing back Sharif family into the political arena.

Also forms a committee led by retired SC judge Shakirullah Jan to oversee working of the health body

  • Court orders four policemen’s arrest

    The policemen have been blamed for the illegal detention of juvenile brothers

  • Apex court orders lab tests of packed milk in Sindh

    CJP orders PCSIR to check quality and ingredients of the product

    More in Pakistan

    Original news :