Top anti-graft watchdog Wednesday claimed that the then Prime Minister, Nawaz Sharif, influenced to keep National Accountability Bureau away from filing an appeal before the Supreme Court for setting aside Lahore High Court verdict in Hudaibiya Paper Mills Limited (HPML) case.
Filing a civil miscellaneous application (CMA) through Ahmed Nawaz Chaudhry, advocate on record, in the matter, National Accountability Bureau urged the apex court to condone a delay of three-and-a-half-years in filing appeal against the Lahore High Court verdict of March 11, 2014 which barred the Bureau from reinitiating an inquiry against the Sharif family in one billion rupees willful default in the HPML matter.
A referee judge of the Lahore High Court had quashed reference adjudication before Accountability Court Rawalpindi and barred the National Accountability Bureau from proceeding against Mian Nawaz Sharif, Hussain Nawaz, Maryam Nawaz, Shahbaz Sharif, Hamza Shahbaz, Abbas Sharif, Shamim Akhtar, and Sabiha Abbas in the matter in 2014.
Earlier, the NAB has filed an appeal before the apex court on September 20, 2017 seeking reinvestigation into the matter, to which resuming hearing of plea of the NAB on November 28, a three-judge special bench of the Supreme Court led by Justice Mushir Alam asked the Bureau to submit details, including the trial proceedings of the case in Accountability Court Rawalpindi.
Filing the CMA on Wednesday, the NAB said that respondent No. 2 (Nawaz Sharif) being the chief executive of the federal government influenced the NAB against filing of the petition before the apex court; so justice requires that the impugned judgment be scrutinized on the touchstone of precedents settled by this court.
"And on this ground alone, the delay is liable to be condoned and now when the CPLA is before the Supreme Court, it should be decided on its merits without technically knocking out the petitioner on the ground of limitation," the NAB submitted.
Seeking condonation of delay in filing appeal against Lahore High Court verdict of 2014 in HPML, the Bureau requested for the court's approval in the matter in the large interest of justice. It is further stated in the application that no doubt one of the accused is the 'favorite child' of the law, but keeping in view the shape of scale of justice the complaint is also not devoid of the justice of the court. The NAB claimed that fault or "non-serious working" of judges of the High Court should not damage the prosecution case on mere technical grounds.
Terming the verdict of the High Court, which quashed the reference and debarred the NAB from re-investigation, as blatant misinterpretation of the law leading to grave miscarriage of justice, the NAB requested the apex court for condonation of delay, saying the petition deserves to be heard on its merits.
Comments
Comments are closed for this article.