Daily Times

LAHORE: A division bench of Lahore High Court (LHC) on Monday sought reply from the National Accountability Bureau (NAB), asking it to furnish details of information it required from former prime minister Raja Pervaiz Ashraf, who is accused of bogus recruitments in Pakistan Electric Power Company (PEPCO) and Gujranwala Electric Power Company (GEPCO).

The bench comprising Justice Abdul Sami Khan and Justice Eruj Sajad Gull sought reply from NAB until September 6 on a petition of Raja Pervaiz Ashraf, challenging the summons issued by the NAB after an inquiry into alleged bogus recruitments in PEPCO and GEPCO.

The bench on June 15 had turned down the request of Raja Parvez Ashraf and directed NAB not to take any illegal action against the ex-PM.

The petitioner counsel said that former PEPCO management director Basharat Cheema had been held responsible for illegal recruitment during investigation. However, he added, NAB issued notices of summon to ex-former PM. He said that the NAB summons were result of political victimisation at the behest of the ruling Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N).

He said the former prime minister never influenced the appointments in the sector even when he was the minister of water and power. He alleged that the NAB has been playing in the hands of PML-N leadership and was subjecting Pakistan People’s Party leaders to political victimisation.

The counsel submitted that the petitioner had asked the NAB officers to furnish him details of the allegations but the bureau kept issuing him summons without disclosing any reason. He asserted that Raja Pervaiz Ashraf was dragged into the scandal on baseless grounds.

He submitted that NAB was continuously issuing notices to the ex-PM, which was against the settled principles. If NAB needed information, it should inform the petitioner in writing as to what information it had required from him.

NAB special prosecutor Zahid Minhas submitted a copy of the notice and said that NAB had issued notice to the accused ex-PM while the information it needed had also been clearly mentioned in that notice.

The bench directed the prosecutor to submit a detailed written reply pertaining to the information it required from the ex-PM.