Arshad Farooq Faheem vs National Accountability Bureau through Chairman, Islamabad Ss

Fields are extracted from the reported citation and judgment text. Where a detail is not stated in the record, it is not shown.

Arshad Farooq Faheem VS National Accountability Bureau through Chairman, Islamabad Ss. 9(a)(iv), (vi), (ix), (xii) & 25 [as amended by National Accountability (Second Amendment) Ordinance (XXVII of 2019)]---Drug Regulatory Authority of Pakistan Act (XXI of 2012), Ss. 3, 7, 10, 11 & 30---Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), S. 265-K---Constitution of Pakistan, Art. 199---Constitutional petition---Offence of misuse of authority---Proof---Regulatory functions---Price fixing---Drug Pricing Committee---Voluntary Return or Plea bargain of co-accused---Effect---Petitioner / accused was Chairman of Drug Pricing Committee and he was alleged to have increased prices of drugs in connivance with accused pharmaceutical companies who had entered into plea bargain---Trial Court declined to acquit petitioner / accused in exercise of powers under S.265-K, Cr.P.C.---Validity---Provisions of Drug Regulatory Authority of Pakistan Act, 2012 has overriding effect upon National Accountability Ordinance, 1999---Both were special laws having different jurisdictions to settle their technical aspects but Drug Regulatory Authority of Pakistan Act, 2012 had ultimate authority to fix or re-fix price of any drug or it could decrease or increase the same, which was not in the purview of National Accountability Ordinance, 1999 and the latter having overriding effect had to be applied---In case of conflict between two special laws, the conflict had to be resolved by reference to purpose and policy underlining the two enactments and clear intendment conveyed by the language of relevant provision therein---Pharmaceutical companies who allegedly earned some benefits and entered into plea bargain or voluntary return and return of huge sums of money could not be considered a charge against petitioner / accused, the then Chairman of Drug Pricing Committee, who was not all alone to settle technical questions on the basis of record, data or other documents having fake or maneuvered record or managed by those companies as alleged by NAB---There was not an iota of evidence to prosecute petitioner / accused in any manner who had performed his duties, though certain irregularities had been pointed out but the same were not within the purview of criminal misconduct as required under S.9(a)(iv(vi)(ix) and (xii) of National Accountability Ordinance, 1999, especially when explanation had come into play through National Accountability (Second Amendment) Ordinance, 2019---High Court acquitted petitioner / accused of the charge as reference was not proceedable---Constitutional petition was allowed in circumstances.

Arshad Farooq Faheem vs National Accountability Bureau through Chairman, Islamabad Ss — 2025 PCrLJ 1773 ISLAMABAD

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2025 PCRLJ