NAB reply sought on plea challenging inquiry

PTI, PML-N lawmakers seek court intervention in assets probes


Our Correspondent July 14, 2020

LAHORE:

A Lahore High Court (LHC) division bench on Monday sought a reply from the National Accountability Bureau (NAB) by July 28 on a petition filed by Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) MPA Ghazanfar Abbas against an inquiry initiated against him in an assets beyond means case.

The petitioner MPA from Bhakkar, making NAB respondent in his petition, contended that the bureau had initiated an inquiry on allegations of owning assets beyond means against him, although he had declared all his assents and submitted tax returns. He was at a loss to understand why the NAB was continuing the inquiry, he said. He requested the court to declare a notice issued by NAB as null and void.

Meanwhile, an LHC division bench sought reply from NAB by July 27 on a plea for pre-arrest bail of Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N) MNA Mohsin Shah Nawaz Ranjha. Ranjha had also challenged a NAB inquiry initiated against him in an assets beyond means case.

Owners of amusement parks approach LHC

The petitioner contended that NAB had issued him notices without elaborating the complaint and sharing relevant documents.

He implored the court that he had submitted several applications requesting NAB to intimate him about allegations levelled against him.

He said the anti-graft watchdog had issued notices summoning him to its office rather than providing him material about the allegations.

He told the court that NAB had the complete record of all assets which he had declared and he could not understand why he was still being summoned.

He requested the court that NAB be directed to refrain from initiating any illegal proceedings against him. The bench, accepting the plea, issued a notice to NAB and sought a reply.

Published in The Express Tribune, July 14th, 2020.

COMMENTS

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