No deal: Judge refuses to hear Sharjeel Memon’s plea

Former minister petitioned the court to restrain NAB from arresting him in corruption case


Our Correspondent January 14, 2016
Sharjeel Memon. PHOTO: PPI

KARACHI: The Sindh High Court (SHC) judge Justice Aftab Ahmed Gorar declined on Thursday to proceed with a petition filed by Pakistan People Party leader Sharjeel Inam Memon, who sought the court's direction to restrain the National Accountability Bureau (NAB) from arresting him in relation to an inquiry pertaining to corruption.

The former provincial information minister, who is reportedly living in self-exile in the United Kingdom, filed a constitutional petition with the SHC to avoid his possible arrest by NAB at the airport on his arrival in Pakistan.

The matter was fixed on Thursday before a division bench, comprising Justices Naimatullah Phulpoto and Gorar, however, the latter refused to hear the petition. It has now been referred to the SHC chief justice who will assign the task to another bench of which Justice Gorar is not a member.

At a previous hearing, another bench had directed the NAB and Federal Investigation Agency (FIA) to inform the court whether any inquiries were pending with them against the former minister.

The petitioner has submitted to the court that NAB was trying to implicate him in cases for no reason and that too without letting him defend himself. He pledged that he was never involved in any corruption or misuse of authority.

Memon has petitioned the SHC to restrain the NAB and FIA from arresting him. He has also pleaded to the court to ask the authorities to disclose the reasons for the cases against him and verify, under oath, regarding the pendency of any inquiry against him.

Published in The Express Tribune, January 15th, 2016.

COMMENTS (1)

syed & syed | 8 years ago | Reply Shargeel Memon have taken judiciary as a joke. Why the Judges have become so weak not to hear the case
Replying to X

Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.

For more information, please see our Comments FAQ