Supreme Court Poised to Rule on Jurisdiction Over NAB Bail Applications

Attorney General Mansoor Usman Awan told the court that both appeals and bail applications in pending National Accountability Bureau cases would now fall under the Federal Constitutional Court’s jurisdiction. He also noted that former prime minister Imran Khan and his wife Bushra Imran have filed chamber appeals seeking Supreme Court involvement in the Al‑Qadir Trust matter.

ISLAMABAD: A three‑judge Supreme Court bench, led by Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar and including Justices Musarrat Hilali and Shahid Bilal Hassan, signaled on Tuesday that it would examine in detail whether it retains the authority to hear bail applications in pending NAB cases, or whether such matters must be transferred to the newly created Federal Constitutional Court under the 27th Constitutional Amendment.

The bench is considering whether pending appeals and bail applications in NAB cases belong to the category that must be shifted to the FCC for final determination.

AGP Awan argued that it would be legally inappropriate to split a case between the Supreme Court and the FCC. He pointed out that the NAB Amendment Act of 2026 transfers all appeals and bail applications against high‑court decisions in NAB cases to the FCC.

He added that, on March 5, Section 32‑A was inserted into the National Accountability (Amendment) Act, 2026, creating a right to a second appeal. The provision allows a convicted person—or the Prosecutor General Accountability, if so directed by the NAB chairman—who is dissatisfied with a High Court decision under Section 32 to lodge a second appeal with the FCC within thirty days.

According to the AGP, this amendment removes Supreme Court jurisdiction over NAB appeals and bail matters, directing those cases to the FCC. He stressed that the right of appeal remains intact; it has merely been rerouted to the FCC, and under Article 175(F‑2) cases already pending before the Supreme Court were automatically transferred.

During the hearing, Justice Mazhar asked whether the transfer had already taken place. Nasir Mehmood Mughal, counsel for NAB, replied that the cases had not yet been moved to the FCC.

When Justice Mazhar inquired whether the Supreme Court could still grant bail in NAB cases, the NAB representative said the right of appeal had been assigned to the FCC by the 2026 amendment. He contended that separating the bail forum from the appeal forum is inappropriate, making the FCC the proper venue for both.

Senior counsel Ibadur Rehman Lodhi, representing undertrial prisoner Aamir Mahmood, disagreed. He argued that Section 32‑A’s second‑appeal mechanism applies only to convictions handed down by the High Courts. In cases still at the investigation or trial stage, the Supreme Court retains competence to hear bail applications under Section 32 of the NAB law.

Lodhi noted that no corruption charge or liability has been established against his client, who was arrested in June 2025. An earlier bail request was denied by the Islamabad High Court in September 2025, so the current bail application before the Supreme Court does not constitute a second appeal.

He further maintained that the bail request falls under Section 497 of the Criminal Procedure Code, which governs the grant of bail, and not under Section 426, which deals with suspending the sentence of a convicted person by an appellate court.

A similar plea has been presented before the Supreme Court by counsel for former prime minister Imran Khan and his wife Bushra Imran in the high‑profile £190 million Al‑Qadir Trust case. Although the Registrar initially returned the plea, chamber appeals have been filed contesting that decision. Those appeals assert that Section 32‑A limits second appeals to individuals convicted—or the Prosecutor General Accountability—who are aggrieved by a High Court decision under Section 32, leaving no doubt that only the final High Court judgment from the first appeal can be challenged before the FCC.

During the proceedings, the NAB lawyer conceded that he had previously raised the jurisdictional objection when the matter was heard by the Supreme Court on March 18.

Justice Shahid Bilal Hassan observed that jurisdiction is invariably the first hurdle, a point NAB itself overlooked earlier. The Court has adjourned further hearings until July 16.

Source link