PESHAWAR: Prominent physicist Dr Naeem Khalid has challenged in Peshawar High Court his arrest by Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Ehtesab Commission (KPEC) terming it illegal, unconstitutional and based on mala-fide intentions.

A joint writ petition was filed in the high court by Dr Naeem Khalid, who is chairman department of physics, Islamia College University, and his wife Dr Shazia Naeem, who is also an associate professor in the same department, claiming that the allegations levelled against the former were baseless and had already been probed by National Accountability Bureau (NAB).

Dr Naeem Khalid was arrested by KPEC on November 3 on charges of corruption and misuse of author-ity in procurement of certain equipment as well as appointments in the university. An Ehtesab court had on November 4 remanded him to the custody of KPEC for 10 days.

The petitioners have denied these charges stating that Dr Naeem was neither procurement authority nor appointing authority in the university.

They have prayed the court to issue immediate release order of Dr Naeem with or without sureties and also issue a declaration of invalidity against the arrest as well as investigation into the matter by KPEC as the case is already taken cognisance of by NAB.

The respondents in the petition are: KPEC through its chief commissioner; KPEC director general; KPEC director investigation wing; KPEC investigation officer; the administrative judge special Ehtesab court; and, National Accountability Bureau through its director general.

The petition filed through Advocate Qazi Jawad Ehsanullah states that both the petitioners had done their doctorate in their respective specialised subjects of physicsfrom the Cambridge University, UK.

After their PhD, they had remained employed in the Cambridge University (Cavendish Laboratory) as post-doctorate, and returned to Pakistan to serve their homeland. They have been employed in the physics department of Islamia College University (ICU) since 2005-06.

The petitioners state that it appears that KPEC had initiated an inquiry or investigation concerning ICU regarding appointments made therein and procurements of various equipment. They add that the inquiry appears to be on with the commission for the last over six months, during the course whereof Dr Naeem has been called up and summoned on various occasions.

`He had been given questionnaire to answer, which he had done and returned the same to the investigation officer along with all the supporting documents,` they state.

They add that lastly, he was asked to appear before the investigation of ficer on Nov 11, however, when he turned up it was learnt that this was a trap for the purpose of arrestinghim though it was not at all required in the circumstances when the he was fully cooperating with the ongoinginvestigation.

The petitioners contended that similar matter involving appointments and procurements in ICU hadoncebeingtakencognisance of by NAB and it had been probing the matter since 2011. They stated that there had been presentations given to NAB authorities by Dr Naeem on the matter and it was learnt that NAB had closed down its inquiry finding that the petitioner was innocent.

The petitioners contended that even if the investigation into the matter carried out by NAB authorities was not closed, KPEC could not take up the matter for inquiry and arrest someone in the matter because similar issue was a pending investigation with NAB which was a federal agency.

They referred to Section 35(3) of the KPEC Act, stating that on basis of the basic defect the very arrest and preceding inquiry into the matter by Ehtesab Commission could be safely terme d as illegal and without jurisdiction.