RAWALPINDI: A division bench of the Lahore High Court, Rawalpindi Bench, on Friday set aside the conviction of former prime minister and PML-N Quaid Mian Nawaz Sharif while admitting his appeal to condone the time limit in the corruption reference of purchasing an MI-8 Russian helicopter beyond declared sources of income.
In a short order, the LHC bench announced: “To secure the ends of justice, we condone the delay in filing the appeal. The judgment of the trial court dated July 22, 2000, whereby Mian Nawaz Sharif had been convicted and sentenced is set aside on account of:
i) Lack of evidence connecting the appellant with the commission of offence charged.
ii) Gross illegalities and irregularities committed by the trial court in proceedings.
iii) Glaring lapses on the part of prosecution.
The appellant stands acquitted of all the charges.”
On April 23, 2009, Nawaz had filed an appeal against his conviction — a sentence of 14 years imprisonment and a fine of Rs 50 million — under the accountability laws. The PML-N Quaid had challenged the sentence awarded to him by Accountability Court Judge Farrukh Latif on July 22, 2000, in the Attock Fort.
Calling his trial as unjust, mock and hasty, the former prime minister had said according to the National Accountability Bureau (NAB) Ordinance 1999, a convict could appeal in 10 days and that was against the limit provided under Section 5 of Limitation Act 1908.
The appellant had further adopted the stance that even the court at that time did not provide him with a period of three weeks to prepare his defence against the charges levelled against him for buying a helicopter in 1993 through means of income not disclosed in the assets.
Further, he had said that during and after his trial in the Attock Fort, he remained under intense physical and psychological pressure and could not approach the higher courts that had taken allegiance to the military dictator.
Nawaz had also said within a few days of his conviction, he, along with his family, was forced to ink an agreement on leaving the country with no time left with him to appeal against the conviction. And when he signed the agreement he was told that the president of Pakistan under Article 45 of the Constitution had set aside his conviction and sentence.
After returning home from exile, the appellant could not file his appeal before an appropriate forum as the higher judiciary was under the influence of the same dictator, making it impossible for him to file the appeal.
Praying to the court to condone the time limitation, the applicant had said the waiver would not infringe on the fundamental rights of any individual, and, according to the judgments of the superior courts, time limitation cannot become a hurdle in dispensation of justice.
During proceedings of the case, several law points were discussed. The former attorney general of the Punjab and legal counsel for Nawaz, during some previous hearings of the case, argued that purchasing a helicopter beyond declared sources of income could be discussed if proved that his client had purchased the helicopter. Whereas there has been no evidence that the helicopter was purchased by his client.
Counsel Khawaja Haris had told the court that his client took oath from his party workers to strive for independence of the judiciary, so he could not file an appeal before the court even after he returned to the country.
An additional prosecutor general (APG), NAB, pointed out that in the SGS corruption reference against Mohtarma Benazir Bhutto, she filed an appeal against the conviction when she was out of the country.
In the year 2000, Nawaz was tried in two different cases at the same time. One was a corruption case against him for the purchase of a helicopter, and another was hatching a conspiracy to hijack the aircraft of the then chief of the Army staff. His trial in these two different cases was conducted in Karachi and Attock.
Nawaz, in his appeal, had said that the helicopter was bought by a citizen of Qatar, with no proof and evidence of his involvement in the corruption reference prepared by the National Accountability Bureau (NAB).
Talking to The News at the time of filing appeal, Khawaja Haris had said that under criminal laws courts had normally been very liberal in condoning the time limit for a convict given heavy punishment and hefty fine. The state being complainant in general has no vested right to challenge the time limitations as per the law being practised in the courts. Moreover, the lawyer said the appellant remained under the impression that under Article 45 of the Constitution, he had been forgiven by the president of Pakistan, and his conviction stood terminated. It may also be mentioned here that former chairman of the defunct Ehtesab Bureau, Saifur Rehman, was acquitted in the helicopter case by the Accountability Court.Detailed judgment will be announced later.
