Law: National Accountability Bureau Ordinance, (XVIII of 1999)

Section: 15, 9(c), 25 & 32

Law: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)

Section: 63

(a) National Accountability Bureau Ordinance (XVIII of 1999)------Ss. 15, 9(c), 25 & 32---Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), S. 63--�Accused had made an agreement with the Punjab Cooperative Board for Liquidation agreeing to clear the entire outstanding loan of Rs.6,50,26,326 in six instalments ending on 31-8-2002, which was not a plea-bargaining agreement in stricto senso as contemplated in S.25 of NAB Ordinance---Said agreement, inter alia, stipulated re-investigation and re-arrest in the event of its violation---Since final report under S.173, Cr.P.C. had not been submitted before the Accountability Court, the release of accused for all intents and purposes was a discharge under S.63, Cr.P.C. amounting to release from custody simpliciter and not amounting to cancellation of the case or stopping of re-investigation---Impugned order had two dimensions, one administrative and the other judicial---Release of accused had reflected the former dimension whereas his disqualification under S. 15 of the NAB Ordinance had reflected the latter dimension---Court could not have passed such a judicial order, firstly because it was not seized of a Reference against the accused and secondly the accused had not deposited any defaulted loan or asset with the NAB in terms of S.25 of the NAB Ordinance---Said order was a final order amenable to the appellate jurisdiction of High Court under S.32 of the NAB Ordinance, 1999---Impugned order had been passed without hearing the accused who had-been condemned unheard---Application filed by the Chairman NAB before the Accountability Court for the release of accused was only a request for his release under S.9(c) of the NAB Ordinance as it neither spoke of a plea bargain agreement between the accused and the NAB Authorities, nor it requested for his disqualification under S.15 of the said Ordinance---Impugned orders insofar as they disqualified the accused in terms of S.25 of the NAB Ordinance, 1999, were set aside in circumstances. Khan Asfandyar Wali and others v. Federation of Pakistan through Cabinet Division, Islamabad and others PLD 2001 SC 607; Parul Bala Sen Gupta v. The State AIR 1937 Cal. 379; Din Muhammad Shakir…