Ghulam Mustafa Mengal, J.--The petitioner was serving in the Food Department, Government of Balochistan as District Food Controller. An investigation was carried out by the National Accountability Bureau against the petitioner and it was found that the petitioner owned properties in excess of his income. He was arrested by the NAB authorities. Before a reference could be moved to the Accountability Court, the petitioner entered into plea bargaining as provided under Section 25 of the Ordinance of 1999. His application dated 10th August 2007, addressed to the Director General, NAB, Balochistan, Quetta was processed and finally accepted by the Chairman, NAB. The petitioner was directed to deposit the agreed amount as per given schedule as under: a. Down paymentRs, 1,510,960/- on 15th December 2007.
1st InstallmentRs, 1,456,520/- within three months of down payment. a. 2nd Installment Rs, 1,466,520/- within six months of down payment.
2. Thereafter an affidavit was obtained from the petitioner by the NAB authorities for payment of 15% additional amount as interest towards the total amount of plea of bargain i.e Rs,38,64,414/-.
The petitioner feeling aggrieved from the demand of 15% amount preferred the above titled petition with the following prayer: "A. Declaring that the act of respondents in demanding 15% interest on the amount of plea of bargain under the Provisions of Section 25 of the NAB Ordinance, 1999 is totally illegal, improper, unjust, without lawful authority and jurisdiction and is in violation to the provision of NAB Ordinance, as such, is of no legal consequences and has been done in excess and mis-exercise of the authority vested in them. Declaring that the petitioner is only liable to make payment of the amount of plea of bargain i.e Rs, 38,64,414/- and, no extra amount can be charged by the respondents over and above of the same. C. After granting relief Clause A & B the Respondents No, 1 & 3 be directed not to demand any amount from the petitioner except the amount of plea of bargain i.e Rs,38,64,414/-, which has already been deposited on the basis of Cheques.
D. Directing the Respondents No, 1 & 3 to return an extra amount of Rs, 1,13,066/- deposited by the petitioner in excess towards the total amount of plea of bargain. E. Permanently restraining the respondents from demanding 15% interest from the petitioner. F. Any other relief, which this Hon'ble Court deems fit and appropriate may also be awarded with cost of the petition in favour of the petitioner, in the interest of justice."
3. Syed Ayaz Zahoor, the learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the imposition of the 15% interest on the amount of plea of bargain is unwarranted under the law, therefore, the demand of the NAB authorities is not only illegal, improper, but also is in excess of the authority vested to them.
He added that the demand of 15% interest in addition to the amount of plea of bargain by the NAB authorities is void, hence is liable to be set-aside.
4. Mr. Fareed Dogar, the learned Special Prosecutor, NAB, contended that the petitioner during the course of the investigation of the case, accepted the charge of corruption and corrupt practice.
The ill-gotten gain of the petitioner was determined, which he acknowledged and accepted at his own freewill and accord. In order to avail the benefit of plea-bargaining as envisaged by law, he voluntarily offered to deposit the amount of Rs,38,64;414/- with 15% without any duress, pressure or threat. He further contended that the request so made by the petitioner through an affidavit was considered and the same was accepted by the competent authorities of the NAB, to which no exception can be taken; therefore, the petition is liable to be dismissed.
5. We have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties and have also gone through the available record of the case. It is an admitted fact that the petitioner availed the benefit of plea-bargaining and his offer as to the ill-gotten gain obtained through corruption was accepted by the competent authority pursuant to which the petitioner deposited an amount of Rs,33,97,894/- in the account of the Chairman, NAB. An amount of Rs,4,66,520/- as 15% interest upon the total amount is outstanding against the petitioner. The contention of the petitioner-is that the law does not entitle the NAB to claim interest upon the actual amount, as assessed in the investigation or mentioned in the reference. It would be beneficial to reproduce Section 15 and 25 of the NAB Ordinance, which governs the matters of plea bargaining.
"15. Disqualification to contest elections [or to hold public office]:
(a) where an accused person is convicted {of an offence under Section 9 of this Ordinance} he shall forthwith cease to hold public office, if any, held by him and further he shall stand disqualified for a period of ten years, to be reckoned from the date he is released after serving the sentence, for seeking or from being election, chosen, appointed or nominated as a member or representative of any public 'body or any statutory or local authority or in service of Pakistan or of any Province: ' Provided that any accused person who has availed the benefit of {sub-section (b) of Section 25 shall also be deemed to have been convicted for an offence under this Ordinance, and shall forthwith cease to hold public office, if any, held by him and further he shall stand disqualified for a period of 10 years, to be reckoned from the date he has discharged his liabilities relating to the mailer or transaction in issue, for seeking or from being elected, chosen, appointed or nominated as a member or representative of any public body or any statutory or local authority or in service of Pakistan or of any Province]"
"25. Voluntary return and plea bargain:--
(a) Notwithstanding anything contained in Section 15 or in any other law for the time being in force, where a holder of public office or any other person, prior to the authorization of investigation against him, voluntarily comes forward and offers to return the assets or gains acquired or made by him in the course, or, as the consequence, of any offence under this Ordinance, the Chairman - NAB may accept such offer and after determination of the amount due from such person and its deposit with the NAB discharge such person from all his liability in respect of the matter or transaction in issue: Provided that the matter not sub judice in any Court of law.
(b) Where at any time after the authorization of investigation, before or after the commencement of the trial or during the pendency of an appeal, the accused offers to return to, the NAB the assets or gains acquired or made by him in the course, or as a consequence, of any offence under this Ordinance, the Chairman, NAB, in his discretion, after taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, accept the offer on such terms and conditions as he may consider necessary, and if the accused agrees to return to the NAB the amount determined by the Chairman, NAB, the Chairman, NAB shall refer the case for the approval of the Court, or as the case may be, -the Appellate Court and for the release of the accused.
(c) The amount deposited by the accused with the NAB shall be transferred to the Federal Government or, as the case may be, a Provincial Government or the concerned bank or financial institution, company, body corporate, cooperative society, statutory body, or authority concerned within one month from the date of such deposit.r
6. Plain reading of proviso to Section 15 of the Ordinance reveals that any person, who availed the benefit of Section 25 of the Ordinance, will be deemed to have been convicted under the Ordinance, a-id shall stand disqualified for a period of 10 years for seeking or from being elected, chosen, appointed or nominated as a member or representative of any public body or any statutory or local authority. Such person is also disqualified to avail a finance facility. Besides, the accused has to deposit the actual amount as, per the charge. These are the consequences of the admission of the guilt. So far as the question of an interest upon the actual amount is concern, Section 25 of NAB Ordinance, 1999 is silent. The imposition of 15% as I an additional amount from the petitioner is unjustified. The learned Prosecutor did not cite any provision of law, entitling the NAB authorities to collect the amount, in excess of what the actual amount is. Under such circumstances, the claim of 15% interest or the additional amount by the NAB authorities, is totally illegal and without lawful authority, being in violation of Section 25 of the NAB Ordinance, 1999.
7. In view of above, the petition is allowed. The respondents are restrained permanently from claiming excess amount as 15% interest from the petitioner. In case, any extra amount has been recovered by the NAB, the authority is directed to return the same to the petitioner, within a period of 30 days.