Hajj scam: IHC dismisses Aftabul Islam’s bail plea

The defendant has been in police custody for past three months.


Obaid Abbasi April 06, 2011

ISLAMABAD:


The Islamabad High Court (IHC) dismissed the post-arrest bail request of former Joint Secretary and Hajj scam accused Raja Aftabul Islam on Tuesday.


During the course of the hearing, the counsel for the defence Syed Zulfiqar Abbas requested that the court grant his client post-arrest bail.

He told the court that the Federal Investigation Agency (FIA) had filed a case against him under section 409,420,467 and 468 after his alleged involvement in the Hajj scam last year.

He told the court that his client was wrongly implicated in this case and his name was not even mentioned in the FIR.

He was in FIA’s custody for the last three months, even though the agency could not find anything against him. The defence counsel added that all his bank accounts were checked but the FIA could not find any impropriety.

However, prosecutor Raja Abid argued that Aftabul Islam was a member of the committee that approved the summary of accommodation arrangements for pilgrims during the 2010 Hajj. He said that further investigations into the matter are underway.

The FIA had arrested Islam in December last year and on Februarys 1, FIA Special Judge Sohail Nasir dismissed his bail. Later Aftabul Islam moved Islamabad High Court (IHC) for bail.

Of the accused, three were arrested by the FIA, including former Minister for Religious Affairs Hamid Saeed Kazmi, his brother-in-law Abdullah Khokhar and former Hajj Director General Rao Shakeel. However the primary suspect, Ahmed Fiaz, who was appointed buildings officer in Saudi Arabia during the Hajj is still at large.



Published in The Express Tribune, April 6th, 2011.

COMMENTS (1)

Imran | 12 years ago | Reply No bails. These criminals deserve Islamic Punishments, cutoff their hands and legs.
Replying to X

Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.

For more information, please see our Comments FAQ