Supreme Court to Rule on Jurisdictional Clash Over Bail Authority in NAB Appeals

ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court (SC) on Thursday reserved its ruling on a jurisdictional dispute concerning whether it retains the authority to hear bail applications in pending National Accountability Bureau (NAB) appeals or if such cases should be transferred to the newly established Federal Constitutional Court (FCC) under the 27th Amendment to the Constitution.

A three-judge SC bench, headed by Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar and comprising Justices Musarrat Hilali and Shahid Bilal Hassan, indicated that its decision would be announced within one or two days. The court is deliberating whether bail applications in pending NAB appeals fall under the FCC’s jurisdiction as per the constitutional changes.

The federal government argued before the SC that both appeals and bail applications in pending NAB cases would now fall under the FCC’s purview. Senior counsel Ibadur Rehman Lodhi, representing under-trial prisoner Aamir Mahmood, contended that bail applications for under-trial prisoners fall under Section 497 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC), which governs bail grants, rather than Section 426, which pertains to suspending sentences for convicted individuals. He emphasized that Section 32 of the NAB law empowers the SC to hear bail applications in pending matters, while Section 32-A, added via the NAB Amendment Act on March 5, mandates a second appeal to the FCC against high court convictions within 30 days.

Justice Mazhar noted that the court was not questioning Parliament’s intent behind the NAB law amendments but clarified that the SC had not relinquished its authority. He queried how the SC could maintain jurisdiction over bail matters when the NAB law designates the FCC as the appellate forum. The court urged legal counsel to propose a mechanism for the SC to retain authority in such cases.

Lodhi argued that the NAB Amendment Act only transfers high court appeals in NAB cases to the FCC and stressed that bail applications should remain under the SC’s jurisdiction. He highlighted that the law does not grant the FCC authority over bail matters, citing Article 199 as reinforcing the FCC’s role in handling appeals against high court decisions.

Justice Mazhar countered by questioning whether the SC could legally convert a bail application into an appeal, given that granting bail typically transforms such requests into appeal proceedings. He also sought judicial precedents for the SC to hear cases outside its standard appellate jurisdiction and inquired about potential supervisory roles under existing legal frameworks.

Attorney General for Pakistan (AGP) Mansoor Usman Awan referenced historical instances where the SC adjudicated bail matters by reviewing entire cases, such as in the Khawaja Saad Rafique bail ruling, to underscore the court’s broader interpretative authority.

Source link