Co-accused in Dar supplementary reference case not indicted

Judge adjourns court proceedings until April 2, directs defence to submit lawyer’s leave of absence


News Desk March 30, 2018
Ishaq Dar. PHOTO: REUTERS

The co-accused in the supplementary assets reference against former finance minister Ishaq Dar were not indicted on Friday after the defence counsel remained absent from the proceedings, reported Express News.

The hearing of the case resumed on Friday in the presence of Judge Mohammad Bashir, who expressed his displeasure over the counsel's absence.

Reference against Dar: NBP president likely to be indicted on March 12

All three accused, President National Bank of Pakistan (NBP) Saeed Ahmed, Naeem Mehmood and Mansoor Raza were present at the hearing except their counsel Hashmat Habib.

Habib’s aide prayed the court to delay the proceeding for a day due to the lawyer's absence. In response, the prosecutor demanded the co-accused be indicted as there was no need for the lawyer to be present.

To this, the judge remarked that in every hearing, it is requested to adjourn the matter till the next date.

NBP's president also requested the National Accountability Bureau (NAB) prosecutor for another chance to go through the high court order.

The judge adjourned court proceedings till April 2, directing the defence to submit the lawyer’s leave of absence and a plea for adjournment of the hearing.

NBP's president along with two others is accused, for “aiding and abetting” the former finance minister, whose assets increased 91 times in a short span of time. The three face trial in a supplementary reference filed against Dar.

NAB to file supplementary reference against Dar

On September 27, 2017, the accountability court had indicted Dar for amassing assets beyond his known sources of income and directed the prosecution to produce witnesses and evidence for establishing its case.

Dar had pleaded not guilty and is currently facing the NAB reference filed against him in line with the Supreme Court’s July 28, 2017, judgment in the Panamagate case.

COMMENTS

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

E-Publications

Most Read