Dr. MUHAMMAD ANWAR KURD vs THE STATE and others
This matter arises from petitions for leave to appeal before the Supreme Court of Pakistan against a judgment concerning the interpretation and legal consequences of plea-bargaining under the National Accountability Bureau Ordinance, 1999. The core legal questions involve determining the exact import and significance of plea-bargaining, whether it amounts to pleading guilty or a complete discharge of the accused without consequential penalties, the applicability of subsequent amendments to section 25 of the National Accountability Bureau Ordinance, 1999, the implications of the judgment in Khan Asfandyar Wali v. Federation of Pakistan, and whether a deeming conviction violates fundamental rights guaranteed under the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan. The Supreme Court granted leave to appeal, converting the petitions into appeals for a detailed examination of these questions regarding plea-bargaining, conviction, and sentencing under the accountability framework. The key principles established relate to the scope of plea-bargaining, the role of the Accountability Court upon such settlements, and the retrospective or prospective application of statutory amendments under accountability laws.
- What exactly does the term plea-bargaining stand for and does it amount to pleading guilty for alleged offences?
- Whether plea-bargaining amounts to a complete discharge of the petitioners without consequential penalties?
- Whether the concept of deeming conviction is alien to the criminal administration of justice in Pakistan?
- Whether cases of petitioners were governed by plea-bargaining under section 25 of the National Accountability Bureau Ordinance in its original form?
- Section 25, National Accountability Bureau Ordinance 1999
- Section 15, National Accountability Bureau Ordinance 1999
- Article 4, Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan 1973
- Article 9, Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan 1973
- Article 12, Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan 1973
- Article 13, Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan 1973
- Article 14, Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan 1973
- Article 25, Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan 1973
ORDER
' JAVED IQBAL, J.--- After having heard Mr. Muhammad Akram Sheikh, learned Senior Advocate Supreme Court on behalf of petitioners, Mr. Makhdoom Ali Khan, learned Attorney-General for Pakistan, Mr. Irfan Qadir, Prosecutor-General NAB, scanning the entire evidence and perusing the judgment impugned, we are inclined to grant leave, inter alia, in the above captioned petitions arising out of the same judgment on the following points:-
(a) What exactly the term "plea-bargaining" stand for? What should be the exact import and significance, does it amount to "plead guilty" for the alleged offences and empowers the Accountability Court to convict and sentence the incumbent concerned by absolving the prosecution from its bounden duty to substantiate the accusation by producing cogent and concrete evidence.
(b) Whether the "plea-bargaining" amounts, to "complete discharge of the petitioners" and no consequential penalty by virtue of amendment subsequently carried out in section 25 of the National Accountability Bureau Ordinance, 1999 (hereinafter referred to as NAB Ordinance) could have been imposed upon the petitioners.
(c) Whether the dictum as laid down in case titled Khan Asfandyar Wali v. Federation of Pakistan PLD 2001 SC 607 has been misconstrued and misinterpreted when the alleged ill-gotten gains were deposited by the petitioners in favour of the Chairman NAB on 23-4-2001 prior to the announcement of the said judgment.
(d) Whether any loss had been accrued to the Government merely by tendering the medical opinion by the legally constituted Medical Board wherein the petitioners were also members and payment was made by Accountant-General Office to the Government employees in accordance with rules and on the basis of length of their service.
(e) Whether the concept of "deeming conviction" is alien to the criminal administration of justice in Pakistan and is in violation of provisions as contained in Articles 4, 9, 12, 13, 14 and 25 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan which could not have been made applicable in the case of petitioners who were not charged for any specific offence and the notional conviction as provided under section 15 of the Ordinance did not entail the penal consequences of "deeming clause" and the Accountability Court should have fined itself to the question of acceptance and rejection of "plea-bargaining".
(f) Whether the approval for acceptance of "plea bargaining" could have been sought for from the Accountability Court without carrying the amendment on the subject pursuant to the direction of this Court given in Khan Asfandyar Wali's case (supra) and resultantly the transaction regarding "plea-bargaining" stood, finalized on its acceptance by the Chairman NAB and the Accountability Court does not figure in hence the question of any conviction and sentence does not arise.
(g) Whether the cases of petitioners were governed by on acceptance of "plea-bargaining" under section 25 of the NAB Ordinance as enacted in its original form and can conviction and sentence be awarded pursuant to the amendment made subsequently under section 25 of the NAB Ordinance which was not made applicable with retrospective effect?
2. The above captioned petitions are converted into appeal for considering the above points which may be fixed at some early date.
Cited by 1 case
- MUBARAK ALI vs THE STATE 2005 PLD Lahore 168