In a significant development on Monday, an accountability court in Lahore formally sanctioned the closure of the National Accountability Bureau’s (NAB) investigation into the Chaudhry Sugar Mills case, which implicated former Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif and Punjab Chief Minister Maryam Nawaz. The decision was delivered by Judge Rana Arif, who ruled in favor of NAB’s petition seeking to halt further inquiry into the matter. This verdict marks a crucial turning point in a high-profile case that has been under scrutiny for several years.
The NAB prosecutor presented arguments emphasizing the absence of concrete evidence pointing to corruption or wrongdoing by Nawaz Sharif and Maryam Nawaz. After thoroughly considering the submissions, the court granted final approval to discontinue the probe against these prominent leaders of the Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N). This move effectively brings an end to the ongoing investigation that had cast a shadow over the political careers of the PML-N’s top figures.
The Chaudhry Sugar Mills money laundering investigation was initiated following a report by the Financial Monitoring Unit (FMU) in January 2018, which highlighted suspicious financial transactions amounting to billions of rupees. These transactions raised red flags under the Anti-Money Laundering Act, prompting the NAB to launch a formal inquiry later that year in October. At the time, the PML-N was the ruling party, adding a layer of political sensitivity to the case.
During the investigation, it was revealed that Nawaz Sharif, Maryam Nawaz, Shahbaz Sharif, Abbas Sharif, and other family members held shares in Chaudhry Sugar Mills alongside foreign investors from the United Arab Emirates and the United Kingdom. The probe uncovered that between 2001 and 2017, substantial investments were made in the company under the guise of issuing shares to these foreign partners. However, these shares were subsequently transferred back to Maryam Nawaz, Hussain Nawaz, and Nawaz Sharif multiple times without any financial compensation to the original foreign shareholders, raising suspicions of money laundering and financial irregularities.
Maryam Nawaz’s involvement in the case had previously led to her arrest by the anti-corruption authorities in August 2019, highlighting the intensity and seriousness with which the NAB pursued the investigation. Despite these developments, the recent court ruling now clears the way for the closure of the case against her and other family members.
Meanwhile, in a related legal development earlier on the same day, the NAB filed an appeal with the Federal Constitutional Court (FCC) challenging a decision made by the Lahore High Court (LHC) on February 4, 2026, concerning Maryam Nawaz’s role in the Chaudhry Sugar Mills case. The NAB contested the LHC’s ruling, which had conditioned the closure of the inquiry on obtaining judicial approval, arguing that this interfered with the bureau’s statutory authority.
The anti-corruption agency maintained that it possesses the legal right to withdraw investigations prior to filing formal references, without requiring prior consent from the judiciary. NAB further asserted that the LHC misinterpreted Section 31B(1) of the NAB amendments, effectively altering the law by imposing a judicial approval requirement that the legislation does not mandate. The bureau also criticized the court for proceeding without notifying the attorney general, raising concerns about procedural propriety.
It is important to note that the NAB had officially withdrawn the inquiry on April 3, 2024, after which Maryam Nawaz sought the return of her surety bonds amounting to Rs70 million. This sequence of events underscores the complex legal battles surrounding the case and the ongoing tussle between the accountability watchdog and the judiciary.
Overall, the closure of the Chaudhry Sugar Mills investigation against Nawaz Sharif and Maryam Nawaz represents a pivotal moment in Pakistan’s political and legal landscape. It not only alleviates pressure on the PML-N leadership but also raises questions about the future role of accountability institutions in politically sensitive cases. Observers will be closely watching how the FCC addresses NAB’s appeal and what implications this may have for similar cases in the country.
