The Accountability Court Lahore, while issuing a written order on the petition filed by Moonis Elahi against the decisions of declaring him an absconder, confiscating his property and auctioning it, has stated that approving this petition of the absconding accused would actually be tantamount to promoting absconding.
The court observed that this application is not admissible based on the principle of deprivation of legal rights due to absconding. The application has no legal status in the eyes of the law and is therefore dismissed.
Judge Rana Muhammad Arif of the Accountability Court Lahore has issued a written order.
The decision has stated that the application was filed by Qaisra Elahi through a special power of attorney on behalf of the accused Moonis Elahi. A complaint was received by NAB Lahore on January 30, 2023. According to the complaint filed, the accused Moonis Elahi, along with other accused, received kickbacks in Gujarat schemes.
Under the supplementary grant, kickbacks were obtained by misusing powers under the supervision of Ex-Punjab Chief Minister Chaudhry Pervaiz Elahi. The Accountability Court declared Moonis Elahi an absconder on November 13, 2023. Later, on December 20, 2023, proceedings were initiated to confiscate the movable and immovable properties of the accused Moonis Elahi, including bank accounts and shares.
The Accountability Court ordered the auction of the previously confiscated properties of the accused Moonis Elahi on October 13, 2025. The decision stated that the accuser’s lawyer took the position that the accused belongs to a political family and was declared as the accused even before the reference was filed.
Moreover, the action of the court without jurisdiction, legal justification and without any legal status is illegal. The main objective of the National Accountability Ordinance 1999 is the recovery of money obtained illegally. The money obtained illegally is that which is related to the proceeds of a crime, the lawyer argued.
The lawyer stated that Section 12 of the National Accountability Ordinance 1999 deals with the freezing of such property that is related to the proceeds of a crime. If Section 12 of the National Accountability Ordinance 1999 is present, Section 88(7) of the Criminal Code cannot be applied. The National Accountability Ordinance 1999 nowhere allows the investigating agency or the court to sell the property of the accused in his absence. Such a move is against the fundamental rights of the accused, and Articles 4, 9, 10-A, 14, 23 and 24 of the Constitution of Pakistan 1973 guarantee fundamental rights. The Accountability Court issued orders in violation of the procedure laid down in the Criminal Code, and they should be declared null and void.
The Accountability Court has written in its decision that the NAB special prosecutor has raised an objection to the admissibility of the current application. According to the NAB prosecutor, the applicant has come through a special power of attorney. The applicant does not have the legal right to file this application. The accused is an absconder from the law and the court. The orders of the accountability court cannot be challenged through this application. The petition should be dismissed.
The Accountability Court held that the court had heard the arguments in detail and carefully studied the record. The present petition has been filed to declare the advertisement, property seizure and auction orders null and void from the outset. The court has stated in its decision that the main point in this case is related to the admissibility of the present petition in its present form. The question is whether this court can accept for hearing the petition filed by an absconder and accused. Can the power of attorney given by an absconder and accused be considered valid in law?
The court stated that a person who is an absconder from the law and the court is deprived of some of the normal rights granted under the procedure and law. It is a legal principle that being an absconder without justification deprives a person of the privilege of bail. The absconder and accused sabotage the investigation against him with their behaviour. As a result of the absconding of the accused, valuable evidence is lost or made impossible to obtain. Therefore, the accused is not entitled to any privilege when he is a fugitive from the law.
Moreover, the accuser’s lawyer did not present arguments as to whether a fugitive person can be given the right to be heard in court or not. Undoubtedly, the accused Moonis Elahi has been declared an absconder by the order dated November 13, 2023. The conduct of the absconder shows that he has not accepted the jurisdiction of the court. An absconder cannot be allowed to approach the jurisdiction of the court until he appears before the court. The power of attorney issued by the absconder is not validly effective as per the law laid down by the Honourable Supreme Court of Pakistan.
Accepting this application of the absconding accused would actually be tantamount to promoting absconding. This application is not admissible based on the principle of deprivation of legal rights due to being an absconder. It does not have legal status under the law, so it is dismissed.