Zardari, Talpur challenge transfer of fake account case to Rawalpindi

PPP leaders move petition in the SHC terming the move "illegal"

Our Correspondent March 16, 2019
Former president Asif Ali Zardari and his sister Faryal Talpur. REPRESENTATIONAL IMAGE. PHOTO: APP/FILE

KARACHI: The Pakistan Peoples Party (PPP) Co-chairman Asif Ali Zardari and his sister Faryal Talpur on Saturday filed a petition in the Sindh High Court (SHC) challenging the banking court's decision to allow the National Accountability Bureau (NAB) transfer the fake bank accounts case to Islamabad.

Seeking annulment of the banking court's decision, Zardari and Talpur termed the move "illegal". The siblings separately reached the SHC to file the petition, challenging the banking court's Friday decision.

Fake accounts case transferred to NAB Rawalpindi

Last month, a NAB prosecutor had filed a statement in the trial court on behalf of NAB chairman Javed Iqbal, stating that the investigation of the case had been transferred to the anti-graft watchdog by the apex court. Therefore, he requested the trial court’s judge to transfer the proceedings of trial in the present case to the accountability court in Rawalpindi.

Following the arguments, the court had reserved its verdict earlier this week. The court announced the verdict on Friday, allowing the case to be transferred from Karachi to Rawalpindi. Subsequently, the banking court cancelled the interim bails granted to Zardari, Talpur and others.

Zardari objects to transfer of money laundering case to Islamabad

Asking for a nullification of the banking court's verdict, the petition submitted in the SHC said the orders to move the case to Rawalpindi are illegal. Zardari’s counsel, Farooq H Naek maintained that there was no mention of transferring the First Information Report (FIR) in the Supreme Court (SC) order.

He argued that there are "no grounds" for transferring the case to Rawalpindi and pointed out that the top court had ordered that NAB conclude its investigation within two months, which, he said, had already lapsed. He said that it was "important to review" Section 16-A (transfer of cases) of the National Accountability Ordinance, 1999.


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