Increase font size Decrease font size Reset font size

Another judge refuses to hear Chaudhrys` pleas

By Our Staff Reporter 2020-05-13
LAHORE: Another judge of the Lahore High Court on Tuesday recused himself, for personal reasons, from petitions filed by PML-Q leaders Chaudhry Shujaat Hussain and Punjab Assembly Speaker Chaudhry Pervaiz Elahi againsttheactionsof theNationalAccountability Bureau (NAB).

Chief Justice Muhammad Qasim Khan had referred the petitions to a two-member bench comprising Justice Syed Shahbaz Ali Rizvi and Justice Asjad Javed Ghural after a judge of a division bench recused himself from the matter.

The legal team of the petitioners had pointed out that Justice Farooq Haider, a member of the initial bench, had been a counsel of theChaudhry brothers in a number of cases before his elevation. It was argued that it would not be appropriate for the judge to hear the petitions.

Justice Sardar Ahmad Naeem headed the bench.

However, Justice Haider as well refused to hear the petitions and the bench sent the files to the chief justice.

On Tuesday, the subsequent bench was supposed to take up the petitions, however, hearing could not be held due to the recusal by Justice Ghural.

A bar member told Dawn that Justice Ghural was also likely to recuse himself from the case since his family had political affiliations with the Chaudhrys.

Now, the chief justice will fix hearing of the petitions before any other appropriate bench.

The petitions by the Chaudhry brothers saidthat then chairman of the respondent bureau in 2000 authorised investigation against them on the allegations of misuse of authority, assets beyond means and wilful def ault under National Accountability Ordinance 1999.

They said all the three investigations were recommended for closure by the investigating officers and regional board of the NAB during 2017 and 2018 when the regime of political arch rivals was in place.

However, they said, the NAB chairman approved in 2019 reinvestigation and bifurcation of the inquiries against them af ter an investigation spreading over a period of 19 years since authorisation of investigation in 2000.

They asked the court to set aside the authorisation of the inquiries and the order for their bifurcation passed by the NAB chairman for being unlawful.