Disqualification case: Imran submits documents in SC | Pakistan

PTI Chairman Imran Khan. Photo: File 

ISLAMABAD: Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf Chairman Imran Khan submitted on Friday details in the Supreme Court related to the disqualification case filed against him by Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz’s Hanif Abbasi. 

The details pertain to the transfer of around £562,000 to Imran’s former wife, Jemima, from the account of Niazi Services Limited (NSL) — the offshore company of the PTI chief. 

The court has also been informed that Jemima sent £79,000 for the sketch of Imran’s Bani Gala estate. 

The details of funds received from Jemima shown in the 2003 nomination papers submitted to the Election Commission of Pakistan are also included in the documents submitted to the court.

In the reply, the issuance of the loan to Jemima from the NSL account is also shown, according to the documents seen by Geo News.

Moreover, Jemima’s receipt of funds from the Anglo Irish Bank are also said to have been submitted.

The reply states that after the payment of the loan, the NSL account had £100,000 remaining in it which was spent on legal fees.

There was nothing left in the NSL account which Imran could have shown in his assets declarations/tax returns, the reply states, adding that Imran was an MNA from 2002 to 2007 and in that time period he did not get a penny from the £100,000 nor was it a receivable.

By the time of 2013 elections, the NSL account was empty and thus nothing in it could be shown in the nomination papers for the 2013 elections. 

Moreover, in the documents submitted in court today, Imran has included two controversial letters said to have different signatures of the PTI chief. 

On October 3, during the hearing of the case against Imran, Abbasi’s counsel argued before the three-judge bench, headed by Chief Justice Saqib Nisar, that Imran is guilty of concealing NSL in his nomination papers for the 2002 and 2013 elections, as well as not declaring £100,000 present in the NSL account. 

The bench then concluded the hearing with an observation that the judgment has not been reserved in the case as the court may seek an answer to any query that comes to the judges’ mind at a later stage.

News Reporter

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *