AIRLINK 202.44 Increased By ▲ 2.15 (1.07%)
BOP 10.57 Increased By ▲ 0.08 (0.76%)
CNERGY 7.21 No Change ▼ 0.00 (0%)
FCCL 35.35 Increased By ▲ 0.41 (1.17%)
FFL 17.65 Increased By ▲ 0.23 (1.32%)
FLYNG 26.00 Increased By ▲ 1.15 (4.63%)
HUBC 129.77 Increased By ▲ 1.96 (1.53%)
HUMNL 13.96 Increased By ▲ 0.15 (1.09%)
KEL 5.04 Increased By ▲ 0.04 (0.8%)
KOSM 7.11 Increased By ▲ 0.08 (1.14%)
MLCF 45.32 Increased By ▲ 0.70 (1.57%)
OGDC 223.50 Increased By ▲ 1.35 (0.61%)
PACE 7.30 Decreased By ▼ -0.12 (-1.62%)
PAEL 43.20 Increased By ▲ 0.40 (0.93%)
PIAHCLA 17.36 Decreased By ▼ -0.03 (-0.17%)
PIBTL 8.62 Increased By ▲ 0.11 (1.29%)
POWER 9.28 Increased By ▲ 0.13 (1.42%)
PPL 194.12 Increased By ▲ 1.39 (0.72%)
PRL 41.52 Increased By ▲ 0.02 (0.05%)
PTC 24.40 Decreased By ▼ -0.04 (-0.16%)
SEARL 103.80 Increased By ▲ 2.53 (2.5%)
SILK 1.03 Decreased By ▼ -0.02 (-1.9%)
SSGC 44.45 Increased By ▲ 0.58 (1.32%)
SYM 18.66 Decreased By ▼ -0.10 (-0.53%)
TELE 9.57 Increased By ▲ 0.03 (0.31%)
TPLP 13.20 Increased By ▲ 0.12 (0.92%)
TRG 68.17 Increased By ▲ 1.98 (2.99%)
WAVESAPP 10.60 Increased By ▲ 0.07 (0.66%)
WTL 1.79 Increased By ▲ 0.01 (0.56%)
YOUW 4.04 No Change ▼ 0.00 (0%)
BR100 12,136 Increased By 96.5 (0.8%)
BR30 37,133 Increased By 444.6 (1.21%)
KSE100 115,770 Increased By 965.8 (0.84%)
KSE30 36,343 Increased By 240.3 (0.67%)
Pakistan

Toshakhana case: IHC issues notice to NAB for breaching protocols while summoning Imran, Bushra Bibi

  • Imran challenged notices sent on February 17 and March 16 by the anti-graft watchdog
Published April 3, 2023

The Islamabad High Court (IHC) on Monday issued a notice to the National Accountability Bureau (NAB) for not following the standard protocols while summoning Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) Chairman Imran Khan and his wife Bushra Bibi in the Toshakhana case.

A division bench headed by IHC Chief Justice Aamer Farooq took the decision after hearing petitions filed by Imran and his wife, challenging the notices sent on February 17 and March 16 by the anti-graft watchdog.

Bushra Bibi's petition demanded that NAB’s notices should be declared illegal.

NAB serves notice on Imran: FIR against PTI chief, Shibli and others registered

The IHC granted stay in the case by changing the investigation till the final verdict of the Toshakhana case was announced and ordered a halt to the disciplinary action against the petitioners based on the call-up notices.

Bushra Bibi's counsel Khawaja Haris stressed that NAB's notices failed to state in what capacity the information was being sought.

"Providing complete information about the notices is mandatory for NAB as per the judicial orders," he said.

IK files petition against NAB notices

Judge Farooq inquired about the procedure of serving notices as per the latest NAB amendments.

"The Amendment Act says the NAB must establish a reason and communicate it [to the receiver] for summoning someone," the lawyer said responding to the query.

"As per the amendment law, it should be mentioned whether anyone was summoned as an accused or summoned for any other reason."

Judge Farooq inquired whether Imran Khan received the summons. The lawyer then presented the NAB's call-up notices served to Khan, in court.

On April 2, Imran and Bushra Bibi filed petitions in IHC, urging it to declare the NAB illegal without lawful authority.

The PTI chief further prayed that till the pending final adjudication, the NAB is restrained from converting the inquiry of the impugned call up notices into investigation, or from taking any adverse action against him on the basis of the call up notices.

Foreign funding case: NAB summons Imran today

Imran Khan challenged the NAB call up notices on the ground that they are ultra vires to the provision of Section 19 of National Accountability Ordinance (NAO), 1999. Imran Khan said the notices are mala fides and asked the Bureau to withdraw them as they are violative of the NAB law.

He contended that on March 8, he replied to the first notice and maintained that the notice did not comply with the mandatory provisions of clause (c) of Section 9 of the NAO. He stated that the notice was non est in the eye of law.

He stated that after the reply second ‘Call Up’ notice to him on March 16, wherein, he was asked to appear before the Combined Investigation Team (CIT) on March 21. The second Call Up notice was also replied.

Comments

Comments are closed.