Amraiz Khan
Lahore
PML-N President and Leader of the Opposition in the National Assembly Shahbaz Sharif, was arrested by the National Accountability Bureau (NAB) on Monday after the Lahore High Court (LHC) rejected his bail plea in a money laundering case.
Shahbaz was taken into custody from the court’s premises, where a large number of PML-N workers and supporters had gathered ahead of the hearing.
When Shahbaz Sharif reached the High Court, a large number of workers had gathered outside the Lahore High Court. The workers welcomed their leader when he reached the court.
The PML-N leader was arrested from the court premises after a two-judge bench rejected his interim bail plea.
Shahbaz Sharif said in the court that if he was allowed to speak. The judge said that if your lawyer has to give arguments, if there is anything left, you will do it.
Shahbaz Sharif, while clearing the court, said, “I am very grateful to you for giving me the time, I am a sinful person, we all ask Allah for forgiveness of our sins. I have served the people, there is a lot of work to be done and I am going to do it. I have presented my booklet in the court on my work and I will not repeat it. We have saved Rs.1000 billion of the nation. Rulers will not be able to prove corruption against me even after the years. Transparent Procurement demands that the lowest bidder be awarded the contract under PAPRA rules.”
He said, “We adopted the bid procedure in the Orange Line even though “We saved Rs 600 million in the Orange Line. I have been accused of having anonymous assets. If I had exceeded my authority in 2014-15, I should have encouraged my children again,” he said.
Shahbaz continued, “I kept the price of sugarcane high and there was no subsidy from government side. It harmed the sugar mills of my children and loved ones. By not giving subsidy, my sons and elder brothers lost Rs. 90 crore to the sugar mills but I safeguarded the interest of farmers and the national treasury.”
Shahbaz Sharif’s lawyer Amjad Pervez argued that there was no need for any recovery from Shahbaz Sharif since his assets have been frozen, Shahbaz is the only opposition leader who is detained by NAB and does not investigate. Shahbaz Sharif was allowed to speak after the arguments of Amjad Pervez Advocate were completed. A NAB team was also present for the arrest of the opposition leader. The PML-N leader was arrested from the court premises after a two-judge bench rejected his interim bail plea.
NAB prosecutor Faisal Bukhari argued that women in Shahbaz’s family were issued a questionnaire but no one replied to them. He further claimed that no ‘reason was provided for the purchasing of London flats’.
The NAB prosecutor stated that Ali Ahmed and Nisar Ahmed were employees of Shahbaz since 2009, when he was the Punjab chief minister.
“It was through them that money was laundered. They had two companies under their names, and they were the directors of the companies. But accused Ikram used to sign the account,” Bukhari argued.
The opposition leader’s counsel, Azam Nazir Tarar, stressed on the fact that Shahbaz Sharif had come to court on its orders after the reference was filed. Hence, arresting him at this point was beyond reason, he argued. “What is the purpose of arresting him at this point?” his counsel asked.
He asked what purpose would detaining him for six months fulfill if he was attending court hearings regularly.
Petitioner’s counsel Azam Nazir Tarar argued that they were at a loss to understand why NAB wanted to arrest Shahbaz under the said charges despite the bureau completing its investigation and filing a reference in the case. He stated that even case copies had been delivered to them and the case had reached a phase wherein the NAB court needs to framed charges.
Amjad Pervez, petitioner’s other counsel, argued that NAB claims that the assets of Shehbaz Sharif’s family increased but interestingly in the timeframe cited by the bureau Shehbaz’s family did not depend on him.
“A 58-volume reference was filed but no substantial documentary evidence is available to establish Shehbaz’s charges,” advocate Amjad Pervez implored the court.
He further said that there was nothing except for the opinion of the Investigation Officer in the reference.
“No statements of any witnesses or the accused persons had been recorded under section 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. Mian Shehbaz Sharif was not summoned at that time when statements of approvers were recorded before magisterial court,” he argued.
