Case Details

Citation(s)
2018 SLG 2689 2018 SLD 2689 2018 PCRLJ 9
Lahore High Court
Writ Petition No. 35320 of 2016, decision Dated: 10-11-2016.
MIRZA VIQAS RAUF, JUSTICE SARDAR MUHAMMAD SARFRAZ DOGAR, JUSTICE
Petitioner(s) by: M. Asad Manzoor Butt

ZAHEER AFZAL CHATHA

VS

NATIONAL ACCOUNTABILITY BUREAU THROUGH DIRECTOR-GENERAL AND ANOTHER

Law: National Accountability Ordinance, 1999

Section: 25(b)

Law: Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984)

Section: 129(e)

(a) National Accountability Ordinance (XVIII of 1999)--- ----S. 25(b)---Plea bargain---Redetermination of liability---Chairman NAB, jurisdiction of---Petitioner entered into plea bargain which was finalized by National Accountability Bureau and approved by Trial Court---Plea raised by petitioner was that National Accountability Bureau did not determine his liability properly---Validity---Provisions of S. 25(b) of National Accountability Ordinance, 1999, were mutually beneficial to NAB as well as to accused---In case of approval of plea bargain, NAB received money agreed to be returned by accused while on payment of plea bargain amount, accused was benefited of disposal of case against him and had also obtained his release from the custody---High Court could not go through factual controversy in Constitutional jurisdiction, as to whether there were 23 agencies or there were only two agencies---Liability was determined for specific amount and petitioner himself had admitted his liability at the time of passing of order before Trial Court---After lapse of more than eight months, petitioner could not deviate from his earlier stance on the plea of ignorance as ignorance of law was no excuse---No provision in National Accountability Ordinance, 1999 existed under which Chairman NAB could resume his jurisdiction after passing of order by Trial Court---After passing of order by Trial Court, prima facie the Chairman NAB had become functus officio---High Court declined to interfere in the liability determined against accused---Constitutional petition was dismissed in circumstances. Fida Hussain v. Mst. Saiqa 2011 SCMR 1990 and Pervez Alam v. Pakistan Dairy Products (Pvt.) Limited, Karachi 2005 SCMR 1840 ref. (b) Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984)--- ----Art. 129(e)---"Official act" and "judicial act"---Maxim: Omnia praesumuntur rite et solenniter esse acta---Applicability---Judicial proceedings are blessed with presumption of truth and court is bound to believe judicial record unless in case of exceptional circumstances---True principle intended to be conveyed by rule of omnia praesumuntur rite et solenniter esse acta is that all acts are presumed to have been rightly and…
🔒
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