LHC imposes cost on NAB in Elahi case

Declares bureau's appeal against trial court's order for inquiry details frivolous

LAHORE:

The Lahore High Court (LHC) has fined the National Accountability Bureau (NAB) for filing a frivolous petition against an accountability court's order, which directed the bureau to provide inquiry records in a corruption case to the accused, PTI President Parvez Elahi.

A division bench led by Justice Tariq Saleem Sheikh imposed a fine of Rs200,000 on NAB, noting that the filing of such irrelevant petitions wastes the court's valuable time.

NAB had challenged the accountability court's order, which required it to provide Elahi with details of its inquiry into a money laundering case, including witness statements. NAB argued that according to its rules, it could not provide the record of an inquiry to an accused.

The apex court recently noted that frivolous, vexatious and speculative litigations have been unduly burdening courts giving artificial rise to pendency of cases which in turn clogs the justice system and delays the resolution of genuine disputes.

"Such litigation is required to be rooted out of the system and strongly discouraged and one of the ways to curb such practice of instituting frivolous and vexatious cases is by imposing costs under Order XXVIII, Rule 3 of the Supreme Court Rules, 1980.

"[This rule] lays the foundation for expeditious justice and promotes a smart legal system, enhancing access to justice by entertaining genuine claims," said a two-page order on a property case, authored by SC's senior puisne judge Syed Mansoor Ali Shah.

The order noted that there are about 2.2 million (2,255,295) cases pending before all courts in the country—including a sizable number of frivolous cases.

Talking with reference to the appeal filed against an Islamabad High Court (IHC) order, the verdict said the bench was not able to take any exception to the IHC judgment and was of the view that the petition was completely frivolous and vexatious.

"The process of the court has been abused by the petitioner just to pressure the other side and delay the matter on one pretext or the other, thereby depriving her siblings and mother from the lawful auction of the said suit property. Therefore, it does not warrant any interference.