NAB challenges LHC order on Maryam Nawaz inquiry in Chaudhry Sugar Mills case

• NAB says case involved no public funds.
• Bureau disputes court interpretation of Nab law.
• Petition seeks annulment of Feb 4 ruling.

ISLAMABAD: The National Accountability Bureau (NAB) has challenged the Lahore High Court’s (LHC) decision related to Punjab Chief Minister Maryam Nawaz in the Chaudhry Sugar Mills case before the Federal Constitutional Court.

The case pertains to alleged money laundering and income beyond means via “dubious” business transactions of the Chaudhry Sugar Mills, of which Maryam was a major shareholder.

The LHC, in November 2019, released Maryam in the sugar mills case on bail, subject to surrendering her passport to the court. Later, an LHC full bench, in October 2022, returned her passport after the NAB said it did not require the travel document anymore.

In its petition, the NAB argued that the high court interfered in the authority of the NAB chairman by questioning the decision to close the inquiry against CM Maryam.

The bureau requested the constitutional court to declare the high court’s February 4, 2026, order null and void, maintaining that the accountability watchdog had the legal authority to withdraw proceedings before filing a reference.

According to the petition, the Chaudhry Sugar Mills case was of a private nature and did not involve any loss to the national exchequer. NAB further stated that no evidence of corruption or corrupt practices against Maryam surfaced during the investigation.

The bureau also argued that the Lahore High Court wrongly interpreted Section 31B(1) of the NAB amendments. It maintained that the NAB chairman has complete legal authority to terminate any proceedings before a reference is filed.

NAB contended that the high court violated the law by making the closure of the inquiry conditional upon approval from the accountability court.

According to the petition, the court attempted to alter the law by adding words not present in the legislation, arguing that imposing a requirement of judicial approval was equivalent to amending a law passed by parliament.

It stated that if parliament had intended such approval to be mandatory, it would have explicitly written it into the law. The petition recalled that CM Maryam had been accused of money laundering and suspicious transactions in the Chaudhry Sugar Mills inquiry.

However, NAB later closed the case after concluding the investigation and declaring it a private matter.

Following the closure of the inquiry, Maryam approached the LHC seeking the return of her Rs70 million surety bonds.

The high court had ruled that NAB should submit its report regarding the closure of the inquiry before the accountability court and directed that the accountability court decide within one month on final approval and the return of the amount.

NAB said its executive board had withdrawn the proceedings under Section 31B(1) on April 3, 2024.

After the withdrawal of the proceedings, Maryam filed a miscellaneous petition in the Lahore High Court seeking the return of the Rs70 million surety amount.

The high court ruled that the accountability court in Lahore should decide the matter within a month.

NAB argued that if a case is withdrawn at the inquiry stage, the accountability court has no judicial authority in the matter.

The bureau further argued that where the law does not require judicial approval, such a condition cannot be introduced through a court ruling.

It also stated that the LHC issued its decision without issuing notice to the attorney general’s office.

According to NAB, once the chairman had approved the withdrawal of the case, the high court had no authority to reinterpret the law.

The petition further claimed that the Lahore High Court had taken suo motu notice of the matter despite lacking jurisdiction.

The appeal has been filed through an additional prosecutor general.