The National Accountability Bureau (NAB) prayed to Islamabad High Court to dismiss former Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif's petition for suspension of the Accountability Court judgment in the Avenfield reference case as well as grant of bail. The NAB on Saturday filed reply of the ex-PM's writ petition saying; "It is neither maintainable, nor is competent; therefore, it graciously be dismissed."
A division bench of the IHC comprising Justice Athar Minallah and Justice Mian Gul Aurangzeb on August 16, 2018 on the request of NAB had adjourned the hearing until August 20. The bench had directed the NAB to file reply.
The writ petition reflects that in the garb of the present petition, annulment of the judgment dated 06-07-2018 passed by the Accountability Court has been requested by passing the procedure.
The gross procedural deviation cannot be permitted as it will cause prejudice to the vested rights of the applicant and touch the merits of the appeal, which is not permissible in law, as it would virtually nullify the outcome of the appeal, which is fixed for hearing after the summer vacations therefore any proceedings other than the appeal at this stage would cause gross miscarriage of justice and result virtually into a decision on appeal.
The NAB said that according to cardinal principle of criminal jurisprudence, once an appeal is fixed, suspension of sentence cannot be requested.
The petition stated that the sub-section (v) is totally independent of sub-section (iv), thus any sentencing under Section 9(a)(v) of NAO 1999 adequately serves the purpose of the Section 9(a). Therefore the conviction under Section 9(a)(v) squarely establishes that the petitioner indulged into the offence of corruption and corrupt practices, for which detailed incriminating evidence is floating on record and consequently has resulted in the conviction of the petitioner. Therefore, the appellant has not indulged in corruption and corrupt practices is completely misconceived and in derogation of the language couched in sub-section 9(a) of NAO, 1999.
The NAB said that the Section 9(b) of NAO, 1999 contemplates that all offences under the Section 9 of the Ordinance are non-bailable and no court shall have the jurisdiction to grant bail even to an accused in custody. He said the NAO has overriding effect over any other statute and it is supplemented by Section 3 of NAO, 1999.
The NAB said the convict should have approached the Appellate Court under the Section 32 of NAO, 1999; therefore, filing a writ petition is circumventing the procedure and legal enactment.
The NAB said that to date the application for filing amended writ petition has not been provided to the applicant. This is likely to prejudice the cause of the applicant as the august court has already held that the writ petition has not been properly filed; therefore, the matter cannot proceed till the needful is permitted to be done by this august court. The NAB said that the applicant has not made it party in this case; therefore, they should be allowed to implead in this case.