AHMAD ALI, J. The petitioner through this petition filed under Article 199 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973, is seeking the following relief: It is, therefore, respectfully prayed that by accepting this writ petition, the forfeiture proceedings initiated by the respondents No. 1 to 5 may be declared illegal, without lawful authority , without jurisdiction and of no legal effect and consequently the same may be quashed OR any other order deemed proper in the mater may be passed.
2. Brief and essential facts of the present petition are that the petitioner was charg ed under sections 9 & 10 of the NAB Ordinance and, after the trial, he was convicted for rigour imprisonment of 7 years with Rs.3 Curror fine and forfeiture of the property mentioned in table No.2 to 14, vide judgment dated 09.03.2002. The Appeal filed by petitioner was partially allowed by this Court vide Judgment dated 20.01.2004 and the Cr.P No.80 of 2004, filed by petitioner against the judgment of this Court, was dismissed on 17.10.2005. The petitioner then approached to District Collector Mardan for recovery of fine under Section 33(E) of the NAB Ordinance, and accordingly the amount of fine was deposited which resulted into issuance of a clearance certificate. However , vide letter dated 08.12.2017 respondents requested for confiscation of the properties of petitioner and on getting knowledge of the forfeiture proceedings, petitioner submitted an application to the Director General NAB about deposit of fine and requested for review of the confiscation proceedings. However , the application of petitioner was filed vide order dated 15.03.2018; hence, this petition filed by the petitioner seeking the above quoted relief.
3. This Court directed respondents to file para-wise comments to the writ petition which have been so furnished, wherein, issuance of the desired writ is opposed.
4. We have heard arguments of the learned counsel for parties and have gone through the record.
5. The record unfolds that the learned Judge Accountability Court No.III, Peshawar , vide his Judgment dated 09.03.2002 in NAB Reference No.4/2001 passed following sentences against the present petitioner , Ikram Shah: a. Rigorous imprisonment for a term of 7 years; b. Fine of Rs.3,00,00,000/- (three curror); c. The properties mentioned in tables No.2 to 14 of the Judgment, which are still in the names of accused Ikram Shah, his wife Mst. Nasima Begum, sons Haroon and Imran, as well as daughters Mah Rukh and Gulsanga, were forfeited to appropriate Government under Section 10(a) of NAB Ordinance; d. The amount of Rs.9,63,000/- in PLS Account No.3819-0 in National Bank of Pakistan, Maneri Branch, Swabi admittedly earned through sale of plot in Habibullah Colony Abbottabad was also forfeited to appropriate Government under Section 10(a) of NAB Ordinance. e. The fine mentioned above would be paid within one month to state failing which it would be set off against the forfeited property in terms of Section 1 1 of the NAB Ordinance. f. The accused, from this date, shall be disqualified for TEN years for holding any public office in terms of Section 15 of the NAB Ordinance. g. The benefit of Section 382-B Cr .P.C. was extended to accused.
6. The Ehtesab Criminal Appeal No.05 of 2002, filed by the petitioner , against the said conviction was dismissed with some modifications vide Judgment dated 20.01.2004 and according to Para No.24 of the said judgment, following properties purchased in the names of petitioner his wife and children along with construction stood forfeited to the appropriate government/state: i. Land measuring 1 kanals 17 marlas situated at Sugar mills Road Mardan purchased in the names of wife of the appellant, and children vide mutations No.14387, 14388, 14389, 14390, 14391, attested on 14.04.1994 Ex.P.W.3/3 to Ex.P .W.3/7. ii. Land measuring 14 marlas situated in Chak Mardan purchased vide mutation No.11650 attested on 31.07.31994 Ex.P.W.3/1. iii. Land measuring 57 kanals 15 marlas situated at Chak Mardan purchased vide mutation No.5581 attested on 29.05.1996 Ex.P .W.3/9; iv. Land measuring 11 Kanals 11 marlas situated at Ferozpura Takht Bhai purchased vide mutation No.293 attested on 16.06.1999; v. Land measuring 12 kanals 14 situated at chak Mardan purchased vide mutation No.1746 attested on 27.10.1996 Ex.P.W.3/8; vi. A sum of Rs.2,56,492/- lying in Account No.2971 at allied Bank Ltd. Charsadda Branch.
Per Paras No.25 to 27 of the judgment dated 20.01.2004, amount lying in PLS Account No.3819-0 at NBP Maner Branch Swabi was not forfeited. Vehicle Pajero and Suzuki Car were not forfeited. The conviction under Section 9(v) of the NAB ordinance was maintained as petitioner was unable to account for a sum of Rs.40,00,000/-; and then, in Para No.28 of the Judgment it was held: So far as his sentence under section 10(a) of ibid Ordinance is concerned, we reduce the same to the sentence already undergone by him. We also reduce the amount of fine to Rs.40,00,000/- (Forty lacs). The amount of fine shall be paid by the appellant within a period of two months to the State failing which it shall be set-of f against forfeited property in terms of Section 11 of the Ordinance. He shall also be disqualified from holding any public office for a period of 10 years as per Section 15 of the Ordinance. Properties mentioned in Paragraph No.24 of the Judgment stand forfeited/confiscated to appropriate Government/State . Benefit of Section 382-B Cr.P.C. shall also stand extended to the appellant. With the above modification the appeal is dismissed." (emphasise supplied)
7. A mindful perusal of the paras No.24 to 27 of the judgment dated 20.01.2004 makes it clear that the properties of the petitioner or his dependents as referred in para 24 were found beyond the means of petitioner and therefore, the same were ordered to be forfeited to the appropriate government. There is no cavil with the proposition that both the sentences i.e. forfeiture of properties and deposit of fine are independent sentences, and one sentence has no relation with the other . The value of properties forfeited is in currors which was obtained by the petitioner beyond his means and mere deposit of 40 lac fine, which was an independent sentence, cannot alter the forfeiture of landed properties. All those properties which were found justified and within the means of petitioner have already been released in the supra detailed judgment dated 20.01.2004. The word "set-of f' used in para 28 of the referred judgment cannot be taken as refuge against the execution of punishment as to the forfeiture of the landed properties detailed in para No.24; particularly when the said forfeiture / confiscation was again reiterated independently in the para No.28, which was not a set-of f for fine. Though the petitioner has deposited fine of Rs.40 Lac in 2017 after almost decade of finality of judgment but the sentence as to forfeiture / confiscation of the properties mentioned in para-24 of the judgment dated 20.01.2004 and upheld by the august Supreme Court of Pakistan is yet to be implemented. As such proceedings regarding confiscation of said propertied have rightly been launched by the NAB.
8. In the premises aforesaid, we see no merit in this petition, accordingly the same is dismissed.