ISLAMABAD - The Supreme Court (SC) on Tuesday directed National Accountability Bureau (NAB) to report how many accused it had detained without filing references against them in the courts of law. A three-member bench of the apex court headed by Chief Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry was hearing petition of a property dealer, Muhammad Farooq Ansari, who has been detained by NAB in connection with the Bankers City fraud case since February 2008 without filing any reference against him. The court expressed serious displeasure over detention of the accused without filing reference against him in any court of law and directed NAB to present a report before the court by August 31 about the number of such prisoners. Counsel for the petitioner, Advocate Roy Nawaz Kharal, submitted before the court that NAB had kept his client under detention since long but had filed no reference against him. He said it was a question of public liberty and if NAB had any allegations against his client, it should file a reference against him in a court of law. Prosecutor General NAB Dr Muhammad Aslam submitted before the court that investigations were underway against the petitioner in Rs 150 million fraud case and that fortnightly remand was being obtained from different courts against him. Justice Jawwad S Khawaja observed how NAB could detain a person for more than 18 months without filing any reference against him, while the law allowed such detention for a maximum of 90 days only. However, Prosecutor General NAB Dr M Aslam persistently said that they were obtaining remand against the accused from different courts, which, he said, was not unlawful. During the course of the proceedings, the Chief Justice said that a scale 9 or 11 ASI of police used to submit Challan in less than 24 hours even in murder cases, while highly paid officers of NAB were not even able to file reference against the accused in months. He said it was a matter of individuals liberty and that court would not tolerate the practice. He said the NAB was not performing in accordance with the National Judicial Policy-2009. Meanwhile, wife of the accused alleged that Investigation Officer of the case Col Tariq, who was present in the court, had demanded Rs 10 million from them to release the accused. She said she had written letters to DG and Chairman NAB regarding Col Tariqs demands but both the officials had not responded to her allegations. The court bailed out the accused for two surety bonds each of Rs 5 million and directed NAB to present the accused in the court by next date of hearing. The accused was, however, asked to submit his passport in the court to prevent him from fleeing abroad. The Chief Justice observed if the accused, too, blamed the NAB official Col Tariq for demanding bribes from him, the court would direct FIA to investigate against the said official. The Court also asked Secretary Law to write a letter to all NAB courts to explain why they were granting remand in such cases wherein references had not been filed since long, and that whether they were submitting report regarding grant of remands to the respective high courts or not, and why they were not expediting disposal of cases besides bearing very less workload as compared to the district and sessions courts. The case was adjourned till August 31.