SHC expresses concern over discriminatory criteria of arrest in NAB cases

KARACHI: Sindh High Court expressed serious concern over the conduct of National Accountability Bureau (NAB) and accountability courts in arresting persons named in inquiries, investigations and references in different provinces.

“We are deeply concerned and troubled by the fact that both NAB and the Accountability Courts across the country are adopting different policies regarding arrest of persons named in inquiries, investigations and against whom a reference is filed in different provinces of the country,” SHC observed in a detailed judgment issued on bail petitions of former information minister Sharjeel Inam Memon and others in Rs.5.78 billion corruption reference.

SHC’s division bench headed by Chief Justice Ahmed Ali M Sheikh and Justice Mohammad Karim Khan Agha observed that potential discrimination is observed in arresting the accused against whom reference is filed before the accountability court. The court observed that such pick and choose basis to arrest a NAB accuse  is not only prima facie discriminatory but it will also undermine the public confidence in the rule of the law  and effective administration of justice. It appears that generally the influentials are not arrested and do not even need to apply for pre-arrest bail while the relatively smaller fry are terrified of arrest on receiving even a call up notice from NAB and seek pre-arrest bail which may be declined leading to their arrest. 

The court observed that in Sindh such persons tend to seek pre arrest bail and are arrested by the NAB if it is declined by the High Court even after the reference has been filed. However, in other provinces especially in  Punjab and Islamabad it appears that few accused are arrested by the NAB who are allowed to seek bond for appearance from the relevant accountability court at the time a reference is filed.

“Such cases generally are related to the influential persons,” the court observed adding that such persons are not even requested by the NAB to be placed on the Exit Control List and they come and go as they please (and sometimes do not return and thereby abscond). “Prima facie this pick and choose basis of arrest of accused amount to discrimination which is contrary to Article 25 of the Constitution,” the court observed.

The court observed that NAB is expected to prepare and as far as possible adhere to (exceptional cases excluded) a uniform policy of  arrest  under section 24 (a) and (c) of NAB Ordinance and other applicable provisions of the NAO applicable to each province and all persons no matter however high or low there position in life may be.

The court directed the administrative judge of accountability courts in Sindh to ensure that all accountability courts  apply both a uniform and consistent policy strictly in accordance with the law in issuing non-bailable warrants of arrest after a reference is filed against an accused who has not been arrested by the NAB and is not an absconder and not on pre-arrest bail keeping in view of section 9 (b) of NAB Ordinance. The SHC observed that since NAB cases are non-bailable much will depend on the final outcome of the case similar to section 91 of Cr.P.C which is already pending before court for determination.

The court observed that all accountability courts throughout the country should have a consistent policy in dealing with such cases in accordance with the law once a reference has been filed and the accountability court  summons the accused keeping in view that under section 9 of NAB Ordinance cases are non-bailable.

The court directed that accountability courts throughout the country need to apply uniform and consistent policies in accordance with the law otherwise the perception of discriminatory treatment by the accountability courts may undermine the public confidence.

The court observed that it is tragic and rather ironic that information department is squandering billions of rupees  in corruption associated with advertising campaigns on world water day, tinted mirrors and pressure horns, cultural festivals etc when such money could have been utilized to give genuine relief to the public in different parts of the Sindh such as provision of portable drinking water in rural areas, maintaining hospitals and schools etc which would have really improved the quality of life  and made an actual positive and beneficial difference to their lives.

Dismissing bail petitions of Sharjeel Inam Memon and 13 others, the court observed that the current case is more of a case of a joint criminal enterprise whereby every accused plays his role to achieve a criminal object and all of them   were aware that it could not have been achieved without the active participation of all involved.

The SHC on October 23 had rejected the protective bail of former information minister Sharjeel Inam Memon, information department officers and advertisement companies’ representatives in Rs.5.76 billion corruption case. Sharjeel Inam was later on arrested by the National Accountability Bureau from the court premises.