Ashiana scheme, Ramzan Sugar Mills cases: Non-submission of NAB reply in Shahbaz bail pleas irks LHC

LAHORE: The Lahore High Court (LHC) expressed annoyance over non-submission of reply by the National Accountability Bureau to the bail petitions of opposition leader in National Assembly Shahbaz Sharif in the Ashiana scheme and Ramzan Sugar Mills cases.

As the hearing commenced on Tuesday, a two-judge bench headed by Justice Malik Shehzad Ahmed asked the NAB prosecutor whether he had filed a reply. At which, he sought more time to submit a reply and requested the bench to adjourn the hearing for a week.

This infuriated the court. Justice Malik Shehzad took the NAB’s prosecutor to task for the unprofessional attitude. Is this the way you work? You seek adjournment on each and every date (of hearing), the judge chided prosecutor, warning him that no further adjournment would be given in the instant case. “You have filed a reference and now your comments arenot needed,” the judge replied as he rejected the request made by NAB’s counsel while adding that Shahbaz’s bail plea might be heard, if needed, on a daily basis.“Seven months have passed and we will not allow further delay,” he added. During the course of hearing, the court stopped NAB prosecutor from speaking and asked Shahbaz Sharif’s counsel to extend his arguments.

Shahbaz’s counsel contended that his client was nominated in the Paragon Housing City scam case despite the fact that he has no direct or indirect role in the matter. “There are no statements against Shahbaz in the reference, yet he has been on physical remand for 50 days. Even terrorists are not sent on remand for this long. And on the other hand, the National Accountability Bureau (NAB) is not even submitting a reply,” the counsel added.

At this point, the court acknowledged Shahbaz’s counsel. “The accusation is that the contract was cancelled to benefit Paragon Company,” he said. “This is only an allegation. Nothing illegal was done,” Shahbaz’s counsel replied while adding that the case’s inquiry began on January 10 and the PML-N leader was summoned on January 22. The investigative report released on May 7 did not mention that Shahbaz was involved,” the counsel added. The judge then inquired about Shahbaz’s relationship with the Paragon company to which the counsel responded by denying any relationship. “My client has nothing to do with Paragon and NAB has levelled several allegations against him,” he stated.

The hearing was adjourned for February 6, whereas Justice Malik Shehzad ordered NAB special prosecutor Akram Qureshi to submit a reply and extend his arguments. The court warned that no more adjournments would be granted in the case.