Syed MASOOD HUSSAIN SHAH vs NATIONAL ACCOUNTABILITY BUREAU (NAB), through Chairman S

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

Syed MASOOD HUSSAIN SHAH VS NATIONAL ACCOUNTABILITY BUREAU (NAB), through Chairman S. 12---Freezing of property---Exercise of power---Essential conditions---Essential conditions for invoking S. 12 of National Accountability Ordinance, 1999 in a case are; (i) the power under S. 12 can be exercised by Chairman NAB (delegatee) or the Court trying an accused for any offence as specified under National Accountability Ordinance, 1999; (ii) there must be reasonable grounds for believing that accused has committed an offence under National Accountability Ordinance, 1999; (iii) the reasons for such belief of his must be provided in the order; and (iv) property/assets so frozen by the order under S. 12 of National Accountability Ordinance, 1999 must have some nexus with alleged crime of accused being investigated. Citation Name: 2025 PLD 177 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURTBookmark this Case Syed MASOOD HUSSAIN SHAH VS NATIONAL ACCOUNTABILITY BUREAU (NAB), through Chairman S. 12(a)---Words "his property"---Applicability---Words "his property" occurring in S. 12 of National Accountability Ordinance, 1999 cannot be given wider meaning as to include any of the property owned by accused---Such words have to be restricted only to those assets or properties of accused which are subject matter of investigation---If wider meaning is given to it as to include any of the property of accused then it has the effect of enlarging scope of National Accountability Ordinance, 1999 to those properties of accused, the acquisition whereof is no offence under National Accountability Ordinance, 1999---Penal statute has to be construed strictly to preserve the rights of citizens. Citation Name: 2025 PLD 177 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURTBookmark this Case Syed MASOOD HUSSAIN SHAH VS NATIONAL ACCOUNTABILITY BUREAU (NAB), through Chairman S. 24-a---Speaking order---Object, purpose and scope---Statutory authority dealing with rights of people whether exercising judicial or quasi-judicial functions, while passing any order under any statute, is required to give reasons for passing that order---Reasons must confirm that statutory authority while passing an order has considered the matter as required by statute conferring power to it to pass such order and it is satisfied that the circumstances exist which are prerequisite for passing such order---Such reasons must be reflected from the contents of the order---any vague order of a statutory authority, though authorized under the law to pass the order, is nullity in the eye of law. Citation Name: 2025 PLD 177 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURTBookmark this Case Syed MASOOD HUSSAIN SHAH VS NATIONAL ACCOUNTABILITY BUREAU (NAB), through Chairman S. 12---Constitution of Pakistan, Arts. 18 & 23---Constitutional petition---Freezing of accounts---Confirmation by Accountability Court---Petitioners/accused persons were aggrieved of freezing of all their bank accounts including those having no nexus with investigation---Validity---Accounts of petitioners/accused in question had no connection with alleged inquiry/investigation being conducted by NAB, and if said accounts remained frozen then it would have an adverse effect on execution of the contract as it would hamper mode of receiving payment from the employer as well as payment to employees and payment towards other contractual obligations of petitioners/accused---Defense offered by petitioners/accused persons required evidence---Orders passed by Chairman NAB neither contained any reasons nor he had mentioned in the orders any relevance of amount allegedly earned by petitioners through corruption and corrupt practices with the accounts so frozen---So far guilt of petitioners/accused persons had not been established---Harsh order of NAB authorities had the effect of depriving both the petitioners / accused persons of carrying on lawful trade as well as right to hold property in terms of Arts. 18 & 23 of the Constitution---Orders of NAB authorities were unreasonable, harsh, deficient in its contents and incorrect in its result---Freezing orders were an offhand decision by NAB authorities which completely lacked essential attributes of S. 12 of National Accountability Ordinance, 1999, and were not sustainable in the eye of law---High Court declared that orders passed by NAB authorities followed by orders of Accountability Court were illegal and without lawful authority---Constitutional petition was allowed, in circumstances. Citation Name: 2025 PLD 177 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURTBookmark this Case Syed MASOOD HUSSAIN SHAH VS NATIONAL ACCOUNTABILITY BUREAU (NAB), through Chairman S. 12(a)---Word "reasonable"---Object, purpose and scope---Word "reasonable" itself attracts judicial process of ascertainment of quality of consistency with reasons---Word "reasonable" excludes subjective satisfaction and in judging whether a restriction is reasonable, an objective standard, that is, the standard of average prudent man has to be applied Your Search returned total 35531 records from 5200 - 5250 Citation Name: 2025 PLD 177 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURTBookmark this Case Syed MASOOD HUSSAIN SHAH VS NATIONAL ACCOUNTABILITY BUREAU (NAB), through Chairman Rights of subjects---Scope---Statute which transgresses on the rights of a subject whether as regards his person or property, should be construed, if possible, in such a way that it may preserve such rights. Citation Name: 2025 PLD 177 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURTBookmark this Case Syed MASOOD HUSSAIN SHAH VS NATIONAL ACCOUNTABILITY BUREAU (NAB), through Chairman Ss. 12 & 13---Constitution of Pakistan, Art. 199---Constitutional petition---Maintainability---Freezing of bank accounts---Alternate and efficacious remedy---Scope---During pendency of objection petitions before Accountability Court, petitioners/accused persons assailed orders passed by NAB officials freezing all their bank accounts including those which were not subject matter of inquiry and investigation before NAB---Objection was raised by NAB to maintainability of Constitutional petition on the ground that S. 13 of National Accountability Ordinance, 1999 provided mechanism for receiving and adjudication of an objection by any person aggrieved by freezing order passed under S. 12 of National Accountability Ordinance, 1999, and such objection petition was already pending before Accountability Court---Validity---Almost 75 bank accounts of petitioners/accused persons had been frozen by NAB authorities without realizing that those accounts related to existing business activities of petitioners/ accused persons, in which not only pecuniary interest of petitioners/ accused persons were involved but the accounts related to their business activities regarding execution of public contracts and huge interest of the government/semi government organization were also involved---Remedy under S. 13 of National Accountability Ordinance, 1999 was merely illusory---It was not a settled rule that in all circumstances availability of an alternate remedy to an aggrieved person would be a bar for maintaining Constitutional petition---High Court overruled the objection of NAB authorities---Constitutional petition was held to be maintainable, in circumstances.

Syed MASOOD HUSSAIN SHAH vs NATIONAL ACCOUNTABILITY BUREAU (NAB), through Chairman S — 2025 PLD 177 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURT

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2025 PLD