By Staff Report
ISLAMABAD :An accountability court on Tuesday granted former premier Imran Khan’s wife Bushra Bibi pre-arrest bail in a £190 million corruption reference.
In December, the National Accountability Bureau (NAB) had filed a corruption reference against Khan and seven others, including his wife, in connection with the Al-Qadir University Project Trust. The case alleged that Khan and Bushra Bibi obtained billions of rupees and land worth hundreds of kanals from Bahria Town Ltd for legalising Rs50 billion that was identified and returned to the country by the UK during the previous PTI government.
The reference filed by NAB further alleged that Khan, who is currently in jail, played a “pivotal role in the illicit transfer of funds meant for the state of Pakistan into an account designated for the payment of land by Bahria Town, Karachi”. It also claimed that despite being given multiple opportunities to justify and provide information, the accused deliberately, with mala fide intention, refused to give information on one pretext or another.
Khan and his wife were indicted in the case by a Rawalpindi accountability court on February 27, a day after the Islamabad High Court (IHC) had issued notices to NAB on the couple’s post-arrest bail plea in the same case.
As of March 13, Khan, Bushra bibi, property tycoon Malik Riaz, his son Ahmed Ali Riaz, former accountability czar Mirza Shahzad Akbar, Farhat Shahzadi (also known as Farah Khan), and Zulfi Bukhari had been nominated as accused people in the reference. Except for the ex-premier and his wife, the rest have been declared proclaimed offenders.
In May, the IHC had approved Imran’s bail application in the case, setting it at Rs1m.
Accountability court judge Muhammad Ali Warraich conducted a hearing related to the case today in which lawyers Salman Safdar, Zahir Abbas Chaudhry, and Usman Riaz Ghul appeared in court on behalf of the married couple. Meanwhile, NAB Prosecutor General Sardar Mazhar Abbasi, Amjad Parvez, Irfan Bhola, and others appeared on the watchdog’s behalf.
During the hearing, Bushra Bibi’s lawyers submitted a bail request for her in the case.
Meanwhile, Abbasi argued that the request was not merited since her arrest was not sought in the case and nor had any warrants been issued to this effect, adding that the watchdog had previously maintained this position as well.
The judge reserved his verdict decision on the bail application after the completion of arguments by both sides and later approved the request after a brief recess.
The judge adjourned further hearing of the case for Friday.
During the hearing, statements from NAB’s three additional witnesses were recorded to complete the evidence.
The reference
The reference said the “accused […] were given multiple opportunities to justify and provide information, but they deliberately, with malafide intention, refused to provide the information on one or the other pretext.
“Furthermore, it is established through their responses that they have nothing in their defence to rebut the above-mentioned allegations. Thus, they all have committed an offence” under the National Accountability Ordinance (NAO).
It added that the investigation proceedings and findings so far “established that accused persons in connivance with each other have committed the offence of corruption and corrupt practices” as defined under the NAO.
The reference said Imran played a “pivotal role” in the illicit transfer of funds that were meant for the state which ultimately benefited Riaz.
Akbar, a former special assistant to the premier and Asset Recovery Unit chief, played a “crucial role” in the “illegal design of the funds” that were meant for the state, the reference said.
Malik, the reference said, had “actively aided, abetted and assisted and acted in conspiracy” with the other respondents for the diversion of funds earmarked for the state.
Bushra Bibi and Shahzadi also played a “significant” and “crucial” role in the “illegal activities”, the latter also a “front woman” for Imran and his wife, it said.
The reference said that it was “just and proper” to proceed against the eight suspects as there was “sufficient incriminating evidence” available to justify the reference.
It pleaded that the eight suspects be tried and punished in accordance with the law by the court or any other to which the reference was entrusted.
