Athar Minallah, C.J. Haji Haroon son of Haji Hussain (hereinafter referred to as the "Petitioner") has invoked the jurisdiction of this Court under Article 199 of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as the "Constitution") seeking judicial review of the powers exercised by the officials of the National Accountability Bureau (hereinafter referred to as the "Bureau") whereby they intend to arrest him.
2. The Petitioner has been arrayed as one of the accused in Reference No.02/2019 titled "The State v. Hussain Lawai and others". The role of the Petitioner has been described in paragraph 19 of the Supplementary Reference filed by the Bureau. According to the report submitted by the Bureau, the Petitioner is one of the Directors of a juridical person i.e. M/s H&H Exchange Company (Private)
Limited. The Reference has been filed in relation to allegations against A-1 International, a sole proprietorship firm. It has been alleged that an entity known as Omni Group was allegedly involved in maintaining fake accounts and transferring funds illegally. Initially, the proceedings were pending before the learned Special Court (Offences in Banks), Sindh at Karachi and later transferred to the Bureau under the National Accountability Ordinance, 1999 (hereinafter referred to as the "Ordinance of 1999"). It has been alleged that the Petitioner was involved in transfer of funds abroad. It has also been alleged that the Petitioner had laundered illegitimate funds in favour of other accused. The Petitioner asserts that he is engaged in business situated in the United Arab Emirates and that he has been living abroad. However, in his absence he was declared as a proclaimed offender. He had later surrendered before the learned Accountability Court. It is also admitted that he has joined the investigations and is cooperating with the Investigating Officer.
Pursuant to filing of the Reference, the trial has commenced and it is pending before the learned Accountability Court.
3. The learned counsel for the Petitioner and the learned Special Prosecutor of the Bureau have been heard at great length.
4. It is the case of the Petitioner that he has been arrayed as an accused in the Reference and that trial has commenced and it is pending before the learned Accountability Court. The Petitioner has joined the investigations despite the fact that trial is pending. The Petitioner was one of the Directors in a juridical person and that the arrest is being sought on mere presumptions. We had repeatedly asked the learned Special Prosecutor of the Bureau to show us sufficient incriminating material against the accused that would justify depriving him of his liberty. The Petitioner is cooperating in the investigation proceedings. The Reference has already been filed and trial is pending before a competent court. Sufficient incriminating material is not available to arrest the Petitioner on the touchstone of the principles and law enunciated by the august Supreme Court in the cases reported as "Mst. Sughran v. The State" [PLD 2018 SC 595] and "Manzoor and 4 others v. The Stapte" [PLD 1972 SC 81]. The learned Special Prosecutor, despite his able assistance, was not able to persuade us that depriving the Petitioner of his liberty would be reasonable and justified in the light of the principles and law highlighted by this Court in the case reported as "Amjad Mustafa Malik v. Director General, National Accountability Bureau & 4 others" [PLD 2021 Islamabad 266]. The arrest of the Petitioner would be arbitrary, unreasonable and in violation of the rights guaranteed under the Constitution.
5. For the above reasons, we allow the petition and consequently confirm the ad-interim bail granted vide order, dated 06-06-2022, subject to furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs.500,000/- (Rupees five hundred thousand only) with one or more sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court. The Petitioner is directed to extend his cooperation to the Investigating Officer during the course of investigations.