| Case ID |
d6fa1835-a4cb-4945-a470-d3259a1add5d |
| Body |
View case body. Login to View |
| Case Number |
Civil Petition No.304 of 2012 |
| Decision Date |
Feb 11, 2014 |
| Hearing Date |
|
| Decision |
The Supreme Court of Pakistan dismissed the petition for leave to appeal filed by Muhammad Nadeem Anwar, affirming the decision of the Peshawar High Court which ruled that the petitioner could be prosecuted under both the National Accountability Ordinance and the Companies Ordinance for distinct offences arising from the same set of facts. The court clarified that although the same acts may give rise to multiple charges, they do not constitute the same offence under the law, thus the principle of double jeopardy does not apply. The court distinguished between the offences under the different statutes, confirming that the petitioner was rightly held accountable under separate legal provisions. |
| Summary |
In the case of Muhammad Nadeem Anwar vs. Syed Hasnain Ibrahim Kazmi, the Supreme Court of Pakistan addressed the principle of double jeopardy in the context of overlapping legal statutes. The petitioner, Muhammad Nadeem Anwar, sought to challenge his conviction under the National Accountability Ordinance after being accused of similar offences under the Companies Ordinance. The court ruled that both laws provided for distinct offences, and prosecuting the petitioner under both did not violate his constitutional rights. This decision underscores the importance of understanding the nuances of legal definitions and the application of different statutes in financial misconduct cases, particularly in corporate governance and accountability. The ruling emphasizes that the same facts can lead to multiple legal actions without constituting double jeopardy, which is a critical aspect for legal practitioners and advocates in navigating complex corporate litigation. This case serves as a significant reference for future cases involving allegations of corruption and financial misconduct, highlighting the judiciary's stance on maintaining legal accountability while ensuring due process. |
| Court |
Supreme Court of Pakistan
|
| Entities Involved |
National Accountability Bureau (NAB),
Securities and Exchange Commission of Pakistan (SECP),
Islamic Investment Bank Limited
|
| Judges |
ANWAR ZAHEER,
JAMALI,
SARMAD,
JALAL OSMANY,
IJAZ AHMED CHAUDHRY
|
| Lawyers |
Syed Hasnain Ibrahim Kazmi, Advocate Supreme Court for Petitioner.,
Iftikhar-ud-Din Riaz, Advocate Supreme Court, M.S. Khattak, Advocate-on-Record, Muzaffar A. Mirza, Director Law SECP and Ibrar Saeed, Law Officer, SECP for Respondent.
|
| Petitioners |
MUHAMMAD NADEEM ANWAR
|
| Respondents |
Syed Hasnain Ibrahim Kazmi
|
| Citations |
2014 SLD 2111 = 2014 CLD 873
|
| Other Citations |
PLD 2002 SC 273,
Adam v. Collector of Customs, Karachi PLD 1969 SC 446,
Behari and others v. The State AIR 1953 All 510,
Monica Bedi v. State of Andhra Pradesh (2011) 1 Supreme Court Cases 284,
Manipur Administration, Manipur v. Thokchom Birasingh AIR 1965 SC 87,
Sangeetabar Mahendrabhai Patel v. State of Gujarat and another (2012) 7 Supreme Court Cases 621,
Muhammad Ashraf and others v. The State 1995 SCMR 626,
Brothers Steel Mills Limited and others v. Mian Ilayas Mairaj and 14 others PLD 1996 SC 543,
Sher Muhammad Unar and others v. The State PLD 2012 SC 179
|
| Laws Involved |
Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898),
Constitution of Pakistan,
General Clauses Act (X of 1897),
Companies Ordinance (XLVII of 1984),
National Accountability Ordinance (XVIII of 1999),
Penal Code (XLV of 1860)
|
| Sections |
403,
13(a),
185(3),
26,
230(7),
234(6),
282-K,
9,
10,
11,
409,
109
|