ISLAMABAD, May 6: Chief Justice of Pakistan Justice Nazim Hussain Siddiqui has observed that investigations being carried out by the National Accountability Bureau (NAB) do not seem to be in accordance with the law as the NAB is doing whatever it likes to do without being accountable to anybody.

"The instant case is an example of this fact," the chief justice observed on Thursday while hearing an appeal of Iqbal Ahmed Turabi, former manager finance of the Pakistan State Oil (PSO).

The court, however, reserved its judgment in the case when NAB's counsel Jaffar Hashmi could not satisfy the court as to why the case of Iftikhar Aalam, former PSO managing director, was separated from that of Iqbal Turabi.

"Could the offence, in which Mr Turabi is involved, be committed without the knowledge of Mr Iftikhar, main accused in the case," the chief justice observed. The bench reminded Mr Hashmi that the reference against Mr Turabi was initiated on a letter of Usman Aminuddin, former federal minister for petroleum and natural resources. The name of Mr Aalam was also mentioned in the letter.

The petroleum minister in his letter of Jan 17, 2000, had asked the NAB chief to look into the state of affairs of the PSO. He had accused former officials Iftikhar Aalam, Iqbal Turabi, Mr Chakrani and Dr K. P. Abbasi of corruption.

Mr Hashmi stated that the involvement of Iftikhar Aalam in the case was neither discussed in the Sindh High Court nor was the subject matter before a Karachi accountability court that sentenced Mr Turabi. As the case of Iftikhar Aalam was separated from that of Mr Turabi, therefore, Mr Aalam's case was not with the NAB, he said.

The chief justice disagreed and said:"This is our right, and we can see any record or ask any question while dealing with a case." Mr Hashmi told the court that Mr Turabi had already confessed in writing to have committed corruption and also failed to justify as to how he possessed property beyond his means.

Iqbal Ahmed Turabi had moved an appeal against the decision of the SHC with a plea to set aside the conviction awarded by the trial court. He had also sought a re-hearing of his case by the trial court, along with other co-accused.

The SHC in its decision had upheld his conviction of 10-years jail awarded by the trial court, but had curtailed the fine money from Rs95 million to Rs25 million.

Earlier, Muhammad Akram Sheikh, counsel of the petitioner, asked the Supreme Court to put down some guidelines to keep a balance between the severity of punishment and the grievousness of the offence committed.

In the absence of a proper system of awarding punishment, he contended, the recording of sentence had been left to the arbitrary discretion of the presiding officers.