The government’s reluctance to reinstate suspended FIA Additional DG Zafar Qureshi is evident from its dilly-dallying, as Attorney General Moulvi Anwarul Haq on Thursday again sought time from the Supreme Court for submitting a response on the issue. The AG has already sought time twice but could not come up with a clear government policy on reinstating the suspended official.
Accepting the attorney general’s request, the Supreme Court directed him to positively furnish the government’s response today (Friday) on the matter. Heading a three-member Supreme Court bench, Chief Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry regretted that the court ensured that the accused were arrested, but the government protected them. He observed that “it was a worst kind of political interference in the judicial matters”.
The bench, consisting of Justice Khilji Arif Hussain and Justice Amir Hani Muslim, was hearing the NICL scam case involving embezzlements of over Rs 5 billion. Cancellation: AG Anwarul Haq told the court that in pursuance of its July 7 and July 14 orders, FIA acting director general Manzoor Ahmed had issued a notification cancelling the transfers of FIA’s four officials who were assisting Qureshi in the NICL scam probe, and posted them to their previous seats.
The court, however, pointed out to the AG that it had ordered the cancellation of the notification on July 7, but the facts asked by the court did not reflect in the notification. On this, FIA’s acting dg made appropriate correction and placed on record a new notification. During the hearing, the court noted that its July 7 order was duly communicated to the incumbent DG FIA Tehseen Anwar Shah on July 8 through the AG as well as by the court’s office, but surprisingly, he did not comply with the order.
When the court took up the case on July 13, it was informed that the FIA DG had proceeded to the UK in connection with an official commitment. The court observed that the FIA DG had a constitutional and legal duty to comply with the court’s orders as envisaged under Article 190 and he had no authority to avoid or defy the orders which were issued on July 7 and were communicated to him the next.
Discipline: The court observed that the FIA DG had not only violated the judicial order, but ex facie had rendered himself liable for disciplinary proceedings under the Government Servants Efficiency and Discipline (E&D) Rules. Before initiating contempt proceedings against him, the court referred the matter to the Establishment Division secretary for placing it before the competent authority under the E&D Rules, 1973.
The court directed that departmental proceedings be initiated against him forthwith and the result of these proceedings be communicated to the court through its registrar. Meanwhile, the court also directed the Establishment Division secretary to keep the court informed of the progress in the proposed proceedings taken against him in this behalf from time to time through the AG, who would collect the relevant information.
The court observed that the members of Qureshi’s investigating team were in fact penalised for making remarkable progress in unearthing the crime and instead of appreciating their sincere efforts, they were posted out of Punjab. The bench noted that the transfer order was in fact passed to frustrate the investigation of the case.
The court said at the same time, the national exchequer had been burdened for making payment of TA/DA to the transferred officers to join the various places and they eventually came back on their earlier pots, thus notice should be issued to the FIA DG to explain why should he not be burdened to make payment towards TA/DA of these officers instead of burdening the national exchequer.
The court said an order in this behalf would be passed after the receipt of the DG’s reply.
