NAB challenges IHC ruling on Sharif family’s conviction

Tells SC the high court gave verdict without hearing their appeal

ISLAMABAD: Challenging the Islamabad High Court’s judgment to suspend conviction of the Sharif family in the Avenfield apartments case, the National Accountability Bureau (NAB) has told the Supreme Court the high court had given its verdict on merits of case without hearing their appeal or analysing the evidence on record.

The NAB has filed three different petitions under Article 185 of the constitution against IHC division bench’s September 19 judgment which suspended the conviction of former prime minister Nawaz Sharif, his daughter Maryam Nawaz and his son-in-law Captain Safdar.



The anti-corruption watchdog has raised 30 legal grounds to justify its appeal against the IHC verdict, wherein question was posed to the bureau, asking if a criminal conviction can be based on presumption, and if such a conviction can be sustained.

Interestingly, earlier when NAB had approached the apex court against IHC’s September 10 order to proceed in this matter, the top court rejected it with cost but now NAB has filed appeal against the main judgment.

“The concept and principles embedded in group/derivative culpability especially white collar crimes have not been adhered with the division,” says the petition.

It is contended that without giving opportunity to NAB to submit response, Sharif family members’ plea was allowed by modification/recalling of the appellate court’s order and the previous order, in the absence of any review application. The NAB states the IHC division bench has not appreciated provisions of the applicable law, quantum of sentence and has granted suspension and allowed bail till final adjudication of the appeal.

It says NAB did not consider the point on how Sharif family members are aggrieved person within the meaning of Article 199 of the constitution.  To which the bureau maintains the Sharifs have always maintained these properties, acquired through lawful means and transferred through illegitimate means but they opted not a single piece of evidence to establish their stance.

According to Article 177 of Qanun-e Shahadat order, the burden of proof is on Sharif family to justify their properties. It also claims the division bench has seriously prejudiced NAB’s case and may have adverse effect in arguing the main appeal before the IHC.



In a failed attempt to deceive the courts as well as investigating agencies, respondent No 1 (Maryam) had got prepared agreements for declaration of trust between herself and co accused Hussain Nawaz with regard to Neilson and Nescoll which were sent twice to handwriting expert Robert Radley by the JIT, says the petition.

It is also submitted that the IHC division bench has passed certain observations with regard to a query raised by the bench relating to the amount of Avenfield apartments which is contrary to facts and actual facts.

It is submitted that neither the court raised any such query during the course of arguments nor did special prosecutor or additional PG NAB appearing on behalf of the NAB responded in the manner as it has been observed by the division bench.