Case Details

Citation(s)
2018 SLG 2563 2018 SLD 2563 2018 PLD 724
Sindh High Court
Cons.P. No. D-2020 of 2016, decision Dated: 26-09-2017, hearing Date : 13-09-2017
MOHAMMED KARIM KHAN AGHA, JUSTICE
Petitioner(s) by: S.M. Iqbal
Respondent(s) by: Muhammad Altaf, Special Prosecutor, NAB

MUHAMMAD ASIF ALIAS ASIF HAROON THROUGH ATTORNEY

VS

CHAIRMAN, NAB THROUGH NAB

Law: National Accountability Ordinance, 1999

Section: 25(b)

Law: General Clauses Act, 1897

Section: 24(a)

(a) National Accountability Ordinance (XVIII of 1999)--- ----S. 25(b)---Plea bargain---Fixing of liability---Jurisdiction---Petitioner was Bank official and was dismissed from service on charge of misconduct and was aggrieved of order passed by Chairman National Accountability Bureau where his request to enter into plea bargain was rejected---Authorities contended that petitioner had previously absconded and filed application before Trial Court seeking plea bargain, which was denied which fact was concealed by petitioner---Validity---Provisions of S. 25(b) of National Accountability Ordinance, 1999 made it absolutely clear that only if Chairman National Accountability Bureau approved plea bargain matter could be referred to court for approval---Application of petitioner to Accountability Court to fix liability was not maintainable--- Trial Court had no power to fix liability and direct the Chairman National Accountability Bureau to accept the same---Fixing of amount of liability was in the discretion of Chairman National Accountability Bureau and Trial Court had no role---Trial Court gave good solid reasons backed-up with material to support rejection of offer of accused of plea bargain---Chairman/DG National Accountability Bureau properly exercised his discretion in rejecting application of petitioner for plea bargain---Decision of National Accountability Bureau was neither arbitrary, whimsical or without reason---Constitutional petition was dismissed in circumstances. State v. Mohammed Zafar, Bank of Punjab v. Accountability Court No.1, Lahore and 2 others PLD 2014 Lah. 92; In the matter of (Violation of Public Procurement Rules, 2004) PLD 2011 SC 927; Muhammad Saleem v. Federation of Pakistan 2007 SCMR 1008 and Muhammad Ayub v. State 1991 PCr.LJ 2425 ref. (b) General Clauses Act (X of 1897)--- ----S. 24(a)---Discretion, exercise of---Principle---It is well settled law that in exercise of discretion, person endowed with such discretion must act reasonably and not in an arbitrary or whimsical manner and must give reasons for his decisions. Suo Motu Case No.18 of 2010. rel. THIS ORDER PASSED BY: MOHAMMED KARIM KHAN AGHA, JUSTICE:---.--- This petition has been…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register

Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492