SC seeks complete records of Hudabiya Paper Mills case

Three-member bench asks NAB how Sharifs influenced courts

ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court has asked the National Accountability Bureau (NAB) to prove how the Sharif family had exerted influence over court proceedings in the 17-year-old Hudabiya Paper Mills reference.

A three-judge bench of the top court – headed by Justice Mushir Alam and comprising Justice Qazi Faez Isa and Justice Mazhar Alam Khan Miankhel – on Tuesday took up the appeal filed by NAB against an order of the Lahore High Court (LHC) to quash the Rs1.2 billion Hudabiya reference against the Sharif family.

It was an unexpectedly good day at the apex court for the Sharifs as the bench raised critical questions regarding the strength of the case. A number of PTI leaders present in the courtroom seemed upset by the NAB prosecution team’s performance on the day.

During the hearing, the court wondered why NAB did not proceed against the Sharif family in the Hudabiya Paper Mills case during former military ruler Pervez Musharraf’s regime.

Justice Isa mentioned that the reference was filed in March 2000 while the Sharif family was exiled in December 2000. He also asked NAB Deputy Prosecutor Imranul Haq why NAB failed to proceed with the case during that period, adding that under the law, cases should be decided within 30 days. He observed that references could not be left pending before accountability courts for indefinite periods.

Justice Isa also asked the NAB’s attorney to identify how influence was used by the Sharif family to quash the proceedings. “We have to see what kind of influence was used in this case,” he added.

The judge also asked who the chief executive of the country was when the reference was filed against the Sharif family. The NAB representative replied that Pervez Musharraf was the chief executive.



When the NAB’s attorney stated that the LHC had quashed the case over ‘technical’ reasons in 2014 and the court also discussed the same matter during the Panama Papers case proceedings, the apex court observed that every case is decided by its background.

“We are not hearing the Panama Papers case. We are hearing your case,” Justice Isa said to the NAB’s counsel. He also asked him which clause of section 9 would be applicable to that case, adding that the reference did not say that public money was involved as all figures were based on the company’s audit reports.

Likewise, the bench also asked the NAB’s counsel to share the original reference, which was not attached with the case file. Upon that, the NAB’s counsel sought time to file the original reference along with the complaint.

The court also noted that one of the accused, Abbas Sharif, had already died.

Justice Alam then asked the NAB counsel in which volume of the Panamagate JIT report the Hudabiya Paper Mills case was mentioned. The court was informed that it was volume eight. The judge then asked for the volume to be presented before the court.



Meanwhile, the NAB deputy prosecutor stated that accused had made use of the Economic Reforms Act for money laundering. “Fake forms were made to launder money into foreign accounts, and since the accused were living abroad, no action could be taken against them,” he added.

Later, the bench asked NAB to submit complete records of accountability court proceedings along with orders, the court diary, and witness statements which were recorded before the court. It sought a list of all NAB chairmen and their appointing authorities as well as a timeline of when Sharif was in power.

The court also asked for specific provisions under which the reference has been filed against the Sharif family. It called for sharing record of application regarding the restoration of the reference in accountability court in 2008.

Later, NAB requested the court to grant four weeks for it to submit the relevant records, but the court only adjourned the hearing till December 11.