Law: National Accountability Ordinance, 1999

Section: XVIII,10,17(d)

Law: Constitution of Pakistan, 1973

Section: 13a

Law: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)

Section: 265K

National Accountability Ordinance (XVIII of 1999)-------Ss. 10 & 17(d)---Constitution of Pakistan, Art. 13(a)---Corruption and corrupt practices---Appreciation of evidence---Benefit of doubt---Delay of about ten years in filing the reference---Double jeopardy, principle of---Scope--Accused were charged for utilizing the funds amounting to Rs. 4,61,52,000/fraudulently, allocated for salary of staff---Appellants/convicts challenged the impugned judgment on the grounds that, regarding the allegations leveled against them, four references were finalized by the NAB authorities---Out of these four references, three were sent to the Trial Court while one was withheld---Trial Court, after completing the trial in the three references, convicted and sentenced the appellants/convicts---However, in the appeal, High Court directed that the sentences awarded in the three references be served concurrently---Appellants/convicts contended that the NAB authorities filed the fourth reference after a delay of ten years, without offering any explanation--Had that reference been filed along with the other three, the appellants would have faced concurrent sentences---Said fact was also observed by the Chairman NAB, who noted that the appellants had already been convicted in the three references, and further prosecution would amount to double jeopardy--Consequently, NAB filed an application for the closure of the reference before the Trial Court---However, the Trial Court refused to close the fourth reference in its order dated 23.07.2009 and directed that the trial be proceeded--Appellants/convicts also filed an application under S.265-K, Cr.P.C., which was not decided by the Trial Court---No explanation on record for the delay in filing the instant reference from the year 2001 to 2010, when three references against the appellants were filed---Prosecution failed to justify that delay and instead filed an application for the closure of the reference---Since the allegations in both the earlier three references and the instant reference related to corruption and misuse of authority by appellants during the same period, therefore S.17(d) of the NAB Ordinance applied---Said Section…