SHC dismisses 2023 plea that sought disqualification of Rana Sanaullah as interior minister

The Sindh High Court dismissed a petition seeking disqualification of former federal interior minister Rana Sanaullah for misusing authority and illegal surveillance and recording of superior court judges and publicizing the same as not maintainable.

Petitioner Samira Mohammadi had approached the court, seeking a direction for the ministries of the law and defence to take action as per law against the former interior minister under the investigation for Fair Trial Act 2013 and contempt of court ordinance.

The petitioner submitted that the respondent being interior minister was no more Sadiq and Ameen in his personal capacity and be declared as disqualified from being member of the parliament under articles 62 and 63 of the Constitution for misusing his authority for illegal surveillance and recordings and for publicizing the same.

A division bench headed by Justice Agha Faisal observed that Article 225 of the Constitution is very clear and in view of same no case is made out for direct recourse under writ jurisdiction. The court observed that the petition is misconceived and dismissed it.

NAB caution omitted: The Sindh High Court disposed of a petition seeking removal of caution against the bank account of a businessman, observing that the National Accountability Bureau’s caution has been omitted in view of the NAB Amendment Ordinance 2022.

Petitioner Javed Iqbal had moved court seeking withdrawal of the NAB caution on July 4, 2018 under which all his bank accounts and lockers being operated by him were seized following a NAB inquiry against former revenue officials in a land allotment corruption case.

The petitioner’s counsel submitted that in pursuance of letter all banks/ DFIs/MFBs stopped the petitioner from operating his accounts at Karachi with the result that petitioner’s business came to a standstill.

He further submitted that Section 23 of the Ordinance of 1999 has been omitted vide National Accountability (Amendment) Act, 2022 (“Act of 2022”); therefore, the caution placed on the accounts of the petitioner is non est.

Special prosecutors of NAB submitted that during the initial stage of the subject inquiry, the caution was placed on the bank accounts of the petitioner; however, since Section 23 of Ordinance of 1999 has been omitted vide Act of 2022, the caution so placed shall be deemed as not placed.

The court observed that it is an admitted position that the caution was placed on the bank accounts of the petitioner under Section 23 of the Ordinance of 1999; however, the said section has been omitted vide Act of 2022, which contemplates per se that 2 “it shall come into force at once and shall be deemed to have taken effect on and from commencement of the National Accountability Ordinance, 1999.”

The court observed that since Section 23 of the Ordinance of 1999 is no more part of the statute, the caution placed on the bank accounts of the petitioner shall be deemed as non-est. The court disposed of the petition observing that in view of the Act of 2022, the caution so placed on the bank accounts of the petitioner stands omitted.