Whenever any Act was amended or repealed by any Ordinance the Legislature continued giving effect of the previous law as if the previous law has not been repealed. Thus, the offence committed by the accused petitioner between 19-12-2005 to 16-1 2008 being with in the period of continuation of the aforesaid law which were amended/repealed subsequently by different Ordinances/Acts, it cannot be said that the ACC did not have any authority to initiate. investigate, lodge FIR and continue to proceed with the case under the amended law it is to be deemed to have been committed under the law which has got a new life by the saving clause. Moreover, since it appears that from the date of framing of charge on 3-11 2015, the proceeding of the Case could not be concluded in last 5 (five) years because of obstructions created by the accused petitioner by obtaining stay orders from higher court on different pleas, the submission made by the learned Advocate for the Accused petitioner has no substance in the eye of law. [73 DLR (AD) (2021) 83]
