The Supreme Court on Tuesday expressed its displeasure over the National Accountability Bureau’s failure to arrest the co-accused in the assets beyond means and money-laundering reference against PML-N leader Hamza Shehbaz and sought the details of all pending cases filed by the anti-graft body’s Lahore office.
A three-member bench headed by Justice Mushir Alam and comprising d comprising Justice Sardar Tariq Masood and Justice Yahya Afridi was hearing a petition filed by Hamza, the opposition leader in the Punjab Assembly, seeking post-arrest bail in the case.
Amjad Pervaiz, the counsel for the PML-N leader, informed the court that his client was arrested on June 11 last year, a reference was filed against him on August this year and then he was indicted in November. He added that NAB had only recorded the statements of three of the 110 witnesses in the case so far.
He pointed out that it had been one year and five months since the anti-graft body had filed the reference.
Justice Masood asked the lawyer if he was seeking bail for his client on the basis of merit or hardship.
The lawyer replied that the bail was being sought on the basis of hardship as the courts observation on merit could affect the trial.
It was pointed out that according to NAB, PML-N President Shehbaz Sharif was the main accused in the case and the co-accused were only benamidars.
The lawyer contended that most of the co-accused were employees drawing a salary of only Rs30,000 per month.
Justice Alam noted that it was better not to seek an observation on merit from the court as then the matter of the amount of money being transferred into the accounts of the employees drawing a salary of Rs30,000 would come into question.
“The issue would become complicated if the bank accounts linked to Hamza Shehbaz are reviewed,” he added.
On the court’s query, NAB Additional Prosecutor Imranul Haq said six months were needed to record the statements of all the witnesses.
The NAB lawyer further said as the witnesses were employees of the Sharif family, it was difficult to call them to record their statements.
The court inquired as to why the other accused in the case had not been arrested yet. It also asked as to why the anti-graft body had not confiscated the properties of the other accused.
The top court sought the details of all the NAB cases pending in the accountability court in Lahore and adjourned the hearing for two weeks.
COMMENTS
Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.
For more information, please see our Comments FAQ