LAHORE: A Lahore High Court’s (LHC) division bench headed by Justice Ali Baqar Najafi fixed Wednesday (today) for arguments on a bail plea of Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz’s (PML-N) vice president Maryam Nawaz allegedly involved in Chaudhry Sugar Mills.
Tuesday’s proceedings were adjourned following the unavailability of National Accountability Bureau’s (NAB) additional prosecutor general. The special prosecutor the bureau told the court that NAB Director General Shehzad Saleem along with Additional Prosecutor General Jahanzeb Bharwana was present in Islamabad High Court where the matter of Mian Nawaz Sharif was being taken up. He requested the court to adjourn the proceedings.
Maryam’s lawyer advocate Azam Nazir Tarar said advocate Amjad Pervez (another Maryam’s lawyer) presents the nutshell of the case at which Justice Najafi remarked that the arguments should be initiated. However, Justice Najafi fixed Wednesday (today) for arguments.
In previous proceedings, Justice Najafi had fixed the case for Tuesday (yesterday) for arguments with direction to the counsels of Maryam Nawaz to go through the reply submitted by NAB.
On Monday NAB had submitted its reply expressing its apprehension that the accused Maryam Nawaz might flee from the country as she had been trying to frustrate and hamper the investigation. “There are chances that the accused will make herself scarce or going underground or become unavailable,” NAB’s reply added.
There is sufficient incriminating material available on record which connects the petitioner with the commission of offences and she has miserably failed to even point out any exceptional circumstance, whatsoever, in her favour.
The petitioner under reply is misconceived in law and facts as the petitioner accused has miserably failed to identify any lawful ground in her favour justifying the relief claimed. She has failed to establish that her involvement in the instant matter calls for further probe rather she was fully implicated in the commission of offence through overwhelming oral as well as documentary evidence collected so far.
That, even otherwise, sufficient prima facie material was available on record to connect the petitioner with the commission of offences and the petition under reply has been filed for the grant of bail in suchlike matters, the honourable superior courts were of the considered view that constitutional jurisdiction of the honourable court is not meant to undertake a detailed examination of the facts, particularly when the reference under the provisions of NAO, 1999 has not been filed.
In her main bail peal, petitioner Maryam Nawaz sought ad-interim post-arrest bail in alleged money laundering case contending the court that her family was implicated in forged money laundering case and now they were being made the subject of political victimisation.
She expressed her dismay over the alleged partial role of Joint Investigation Team (JIT), probing Panama and assets beyond known sources of income matters.
She implored the court that the then JIT rather than performing its impartial role, had its agenda to implicate her whole family by any mean whatsoever and it was for this reason that petitioner was also summoned to join the investigation although there was no such direction in court’s judgment of April 20, 2017.
Published in The Express Tribune, October 30th, 2019.