PESHAWAR: The Peshawar High Court (PHC) on Thursday re-issued notice to the federal government and judges of the accountability court (AC) in a writ petition against the order of accountability court restraining the National Accountability Bureau (NAB) from voluntary return deal with the accused persons in corruption cases. A two-member bench comprising Justice Qaiser Rashid Khan and Justice Roohul Amin Khan also extended the stay order regarding suspension of the accountability court’s order. The National Accountability Bureau (NAB) Khyber Pakhtunkhwa had challenged the order of accountability court restraining the chairman NAB from voluntary return deal with the accused persons in corruption cases after their arrest. The NAB claimed in the petition that the accountability courts judges had declared that the inquiry against a public office holder in corruption cases after arrest would be converted into investigation. The NAB further added that the court had declared that after the arrest and obtaining physical remand from the court, the NAB could not opt for voluntary return deal with the accused public office holder and could only accept the plea bargain. The order passed by the Accountability Court No.1 headed by Muhammad Ibrahim Khan and two more judges comprising of Muhammad Asim Imam and Tariq Yousafzai states that, “Any accused who is holder of public office involved in corruption and corrupt practices is arrested and brought before the accountability court prior to obtaining his physical custody such inquiry shall be converted into investigation so that there shall be equality in doing equity in between accused, holders of public offices whether such accused are serving in superior services or serving in any other department of the government.” During hearing of the petition, Deputy Prosecutor General of NAB, Muhammad Jamil Khan, submitted that the judges of three accountability courts had passed an order on June 13 through which the NAB was restrained from voluntary return deal with the incarcerated accused. He submitted that the order was not only a violation of the judgment of the Supreme Court, in the famous verdict in Asfandyar Wali Khan case, in which the apex court had declared voluntary deal and plea bargain with the NAB as a right of the accused persons. Furthermore, he said the impugned order was in fact an attempt to curtail the power of the NAB chairman as provided under sections 24, 25 (a) and (b) of the NAO 1999.
