ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court has annulled the conviction of former federal minister Anwar Saifullah Khan in the NAB case related to illegal appointments in the Oil and Gas Development Company Limited (OGDCL) and restored the Lahore High Court’s acquittal verdict.
A three-member bench of the apex court, headed by Justice Muhammad Hashim Khan Kakar and comprising Justice Salahuddin Panhwar and Justice Ishtiaq Ibrahim, announced the judgement on a review petition filed by the former minister for petroleum against the Supreme Court’s earlier judgement.
Anwar Saifullah had filed the review petition in the apex court under Article 188 of the Constitution against the majority judgement dated January 20, 2016, rendered in Criminal Appeal No 264 of 2006. That judgement had allowed the appeal, set aside the acquittal by the LHC dated June 13, 2002, in Criminal Appeal No 1912 of 2000, and restored the conviction recorded by the trial court on November 30, 2000, in the NAB reference, with a modification of the fine.
The court, after allowing the review petition, set aside its majority judgement, and restored the LHC judgement acquitting Anwar Saifullah.
“For the foregoing reasons, this Criminal Review Petition is allowed, and the majority judgement dated 20.01.2016 passed by this Court is set aside, while the judgement dated 13.06.2002 of the learned Lahore High Court, Lahore, in Criminal Appeal No 1912 of 2000, acquitting the appellant, is restored,” said the 16-page judgement authored by Justice Panhwar.
“The appellant, Anwar Saifullah Khan, is acquitted of the charge in this case, while his bail bonds, if any, are hereby discharged,” the court held, adding that all adverse consequential orders flowing solely from the conviction will stand vacated, subject to law.
The court observed that no person can be punished for a past act under a law enacted at a later time if it imposes a harsher penalty. The court held that applying the NAB Ordinance 1999 to allegations against Anwar Saifullah dating back to 1996 was constitutionally incorrect.
The judgement noted that Article 12 of the Constitution prohibits retrospective punishment, while the penalties under the NAB Ordinance 1999 were more severe than those under previous laws. The court further held that the prosecution failed to provide any evidence of bribery or financial loss to the national exchequer against the accused, adding that mere administrative irregularity does not establish criminal intent.
The court held that Anwar Saifullah made all appointments openly and in accordance with departmental traditions and records, emphasising that there is a clear distinction between administrative negligence and criminal liability. The court observed that after an acquittal by the high court, the presumption of innocence becomes even stronger, and interference in such acquittals is justified only in exceptional circumstances.
