ALI QASWAR BOKHARI versus THE STATE THROUGH DIRECTOR GENERAL, NAB (SINDH)
Section 10 and 18 of the Criminal Code (v. 1898), Section 561, a reference to a dismissal of a corruption and corruption reference petition alleges that the defendant purchased immovable and immovable property in the name of his wife, Also had bank accounts. And those investments, which were anonymous applicants, challenged the reference, saying that no attempt was made to record his wife's statement before filing the reference. That he and his wife were separated. That Chairman NAB had mechanically approved the signing of a reference. And in doing so, the chairman did not apply his mind and failed to provide any reason, as required under section 24A of the General Clause Act, 1897, in which only the reference was filed, not merely recording his wife's statement. Will not support it. The fact is that the fax ground was not removed before filing a reference to the law, or the reference was made to the wife of such a defect, it was shown to the anonymous owner of the underlying property and to the original beneficiary. Was charged. Proof of self-petition was on the applicant, who was given the opportunity to provide professional evidence before the Accountability Court, and the applicant failed to disclose when he and his wife had separated. This meant what the word separation lawyer meant. However, the applicant did not admit that the petitioner and his wife had been divorced, the paragraph of the reference stated that the chairman had submitted material and evidence.
Related judgments — Karachi High Court Sindh, 2012
