MUHAMMAD SHABBIR versus EHTESAB BUREAU, AZAD KASHMIR
Sections 3, 4, 38 and 39 of the Azad Jammu and Kashmir Interim Constitution Act (VII of 1974), the Appellants who were employed by the National Bank of Pakistan to investigate the matter relating to the powers of the Accountability Bureau of Section 42 and 44. ? ; And he held the position of Branch Managers, who was involved in embezzlement of a sum of Rs 89.8 million; bank officials referred the matter to the Accountability Bureau for investigation, the appellants referred to the Accountability Court for pre-arrest bail. Have also filed writ petitions for prevention and prevention. Investigation of the Accountability Bureau as stated that the Bureau had no jurisdiction to investigate or investigate any matter relating to such institution. The nature of the allegations clearly states that the bank authorities were against it. He has been charged with fraud, forgery, embezzlement and criminal trespassing. Appellants, who were clearly guilty offenses under sections 38 and 39 of the Azad Jammu and Kashmir Accountability Bureau Act 2001, relied on them in their favor through the appellants, in the case of any breach of trust to any bank employees. Protection or immunity was not provided. A waiver or waiver for any person found guilty of the commission of a crime registered under Schedule I and II under section 25 of the aforesaid Act, forgery, fraud and treason and the provisions of Azad Jammu and Kashmir Accountability Bureau Act 2001 With no scope left, the Chairman Accountability Bureau was given the authority to investigate and investigate any suspects. Under this Act, the Bureau of Accountability was, in the circumstances, capable of investigating or investigating any matter related to all scheduled crimes, under which the appellants were prosecuted.
Related judgments — Supreme Court Azad Kashmir, 2012
