BR100 Decreased By (-0.55%)
BR30 Decreased By (-0.86%)
KSE100 Decreased By (-0.47%)
KSE30 Decreased By (-0.6%)
AGHA 6.05 Decreased By ▼ -0.05 (-0.82%)
BECO 3.83 Decreased By ▼ -0.05 (-1.29%)
BML 58.33 Decreased By ▼ -1.66 (-2.77%)
BOP 28.35 Decreased By ▼ -0.31 (-1.08%)
CNERGY 13.64 Decreased By ▼ -0.44 (-3.13%)
CSIL 5.21 Increased By ▲ 0.02 (0.39%)
FCCL 52.28 Decreased By ▼ -0.33 (-0.63%)
FFL 12.90 Decreased By ▼ -0.09 (-0.69%)
FNEL 1.13 Increased By ▲ 0.01 (0.89%)
KEL 5.79 Decreased By ▼ -0.17 (-2.85%)
KOSM 5.51 Increased By ▲ 0.22 (4.16%)
LOTCHEM 23.89 Decreased By ▼ -0.58 (-2.37%)
MLCF 90.51 Decreased By ▼ -0.52 (-0.57%)
NBP 159.72 Decreased By ▼ -2.38 (-1.47%)
NCPL 49.60 Increased By ▲ 0.59 (1.2%)
NPL 51.80 Decreased By ▼ -0.61 (-1.16%)
OGDC 306.78 Increased By ▲ 0.57 (0.19%)
PACE 9.15 Decreased By ▼ -0.10 (-1.08%)
PAEL 32.33 Decreased By ▼ -0.39 (-1.19%)
PIBTL 12.93 Decreased By ▼ -0.15 (-1.15%)
PPL 213.93 Decreased By ▼ -1.59 (-0.74%)
PRL 96.96 Decreased By ▼ -3.85 (-3.82%)
PTC 45.19 Decreased By ▼ -0.83 (-1.8%)
SSGC 22.53 Decreased By ▼ -0.61 (-2.64%)
TBL 9.02 Decreased By ▼ -0.12 (-1.31%)
TELE 6.72 Decreased By ▼ -0.09 (-1.32%)
TPL 25.91 Increased By ▲ 1.15 (4.64%)
TPLP 12.60 Increased By ▲ 0.31 (2.52%)
TREET 23.46 Decreased By ▼ -0.52 (-2.17%)
TRG 51.96 Decreased By ▼ -1.12 (-2.11%)
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 Updated

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 for this article.