IHC tells Shaukat Tarin, NAB to argue case on merit

Notes that maintainability would be decided based on arguments

ISLAMABAD: The Islamabad High Court on Monday directed lawyers of former Finance Minister Shaukat Tarin and the National Accountability Bureau (NAB) to present their final arguments on merit, and over the maintainability of a petition.

The petition had been filed by Tarin seeking to quash corruption references against him in the Rental Power Projects (RPP) scandal.

A division bench comprising Justice Aamer Farooq and Justice Miangul Hassan Aurangzeb directed the two parties to argue their case, noting that the question of maintainability would be decided after the lawyers conclude their arguments.  The bench has also sought a para-wise response in the case.

Earlier on Monday, Tarin’s counsel Salman Aslam Butt argued that the references were filed against his client after the court had taken notice of the case.

Usually, Butt contended, the NAB chairman approves a reference and then the trial court takes cognisance of a case. However, in this case, he said that ‘procedural malafide’ was apparent since Tarin was implicated at later stages.

Meanwhile, NAB’s Additional Deputy Prosecutor General Sardar Muzaffar Abbasi said that was Tarin among the 12 suspects in the case. He argued that the reference, with regards to Tarin, cannot be quashed. Abbasi further told the court that trial in the reference had commenced while a charge sheet had also been submitted. Moreover, he said that six out of the 43 witnesses in the case have already been examined.

Moreover, the prosecutor said that a trial court had already dismissed an application by Tarin moved under section 265-K (power of the court to acquit accused at any stage) of the Criminal Procedure Code.

At this point, the bench sought a copy of the petition as well as the trial court’s order to ascertain if the petitioner was arguing on the same grounds or whether any fresh grounds were raised.

Butt said that ‘formation of opinion’ has not yet been discussed previously while the NAB’s prosecutor said that the petitioner should avail remedy by challenging the trial court’s order dismissing acquittal application.

When the documents could not be produced before the court on Monday, NAB was directed to submit them at the next hearing. Subsequently, the court directed them to present arguments on merit and over maintainability as both the things were connected and the bench would decide the question of maintainability after arguments are presented.

The case would now be taken up on May 10.

Published in The Express Tribune, April 11^th, 2017.