|
|
|
| April 24, 2003 | Thursday | Safar 21, 1424 |
Wilful default: SC keeps pending ex-minister’s case
ISLAMABAD, April 23: The Supreme Court on Wednesday decided to keep the petition of a former federal minister, Islamuddin Shaikh, pending to allow the Sindh High Court ascertain whether the NAB chairman had the powers to reject the decision of the State Bank of Pakistan governor in cases of “wilful default”.
Advocate Aitzaz Ahsan had raised the proposition that NAB chairman was not empowered to reject the decision of the SBP governor under section 25A of the NAB in cases of “wilful default”.
He said that the case of his client was referred to the reconciliation committee in which representatives of the NAB were also present. The governor of the SBP accepted the decision of the reconciliation committee and sent the matter to an accountability court.
The counsel said that his client had borrowed money from the bank for the purpose of establishing Kiran Sugar Mills, and was ready to pay the total liability of Rs1.2 billion.
He said that in fact, all his property had already been confiscated and the sugar mills had also been sold out which fetched Rs460 million.
The counsel said that the amendment in the NAB law, was made to restore the confidence of the businessmen as the bureau was hounding those who had borrowed money from banks.
Mr Ahsan argued that after the decision of the SBP governor and its acceptance by a person who was accused of “wilful default”, the coercive apparatus of the NAB had to stop.
The advocate said that he wanted to argue that the attitude of the NAB was hurting the country’s interests, and the industrialization process had slowed down, because nobody was ready to borrow from banks, fearing the NAB.
Raja Bashir, counsel for the NAB, argued that it was not mandatory for the NAB chief to accept the recommendation of the SBP governor, as the law provided that if he had reasonable doubt, he might not accept the governor’s decision but for that he had to give reasons.
In the instant case, the NAB counsel said, what reconciliation committee had suggested and approved by the SBP governor, was an eye wash. The governor’s decision said that bank should recover the amount in accordance with law, meaning thereby that civil court should be approached, he added.
He said that after the NAB chairman had refused to accept the SBP governor’s order, through a speaking order, the petitioner was tried and was convicted by an accountability court on three counts, handing him down imprisonment of 14-year in each case.
The court observed that counsel would be allowed to raise the point before the high court where appeals were pending and it would wait for its decision.
Abdul Hafeez Pirzada, who had been engaged by Islamuddin Shaikh to argue his application, pleaded for grant of bail to his client, contending that he was suffering from heart ailment.
The counsel said that he had been behind bars for the last over three years, and was entitled to be released on bail till the time his appeals were not decided.
The NAB counsel, opposed the request, and said that if the petitioner was so ill, as portrayed by his counsel, then something should be done.
The NAB counsel said that the petitioner had approached the high court for bail on the same grounds, and referred to the judgment in which the judges, had examining all the evidence, on the basis of which he was again asking for bail.
The bench reserved the judgment on the bail application.
|
|
|
|
