AGL40▲ 0 (0.00%)AIRLINK129.06▼ -0.47 (0.00%)BOP6.75▲ 0.07 (0.01%)CNERGY4.49▼ -0.14 (-0.03%)DCL8.55▼ -0.39 (-0.04%)DFML40.82▼ -0.87 (-0.02%)DGKC80.96▼ -2.81 (-0.03%)FCCL32.77▲ 0 (0.00%)FFBL74.43▼ -1.04 (-0.01%)FFL11.74▲ 0.27 (0.02%)HUBC109.58▼ -0.97 (-0.01%)HUMNL13.75▼ -0.81 (-0.06%)KEL5.31▼ -0.08 (-0.01%)KOSM7.72▼ -0.68 (-0.08%)MLCF38.6▼ -1.19 (-0.03%)NBP63.51▲ 3.22 (0.05%)OGDC194.69▼ -4.97 (-0.02%)PAEL25.71▼ -0.94 (-0.04%)PIBTL7.39▼ -0.27 (-0.04%)PPL155.45▼ -2.47 (-0.02%)PRL25.79▼ -0.94 (-0.04%)PTC17.5▼ -0.96 (-0.05%)SEARL78.65▼ -3.79 (-0.05%)TELE7.86▼ -0.45 (-0.05%)TOMCL33.73▼ -0.78 (-0.02%)TPLP8.4▼ -0.66 (-0.07%)TREET16.27▼ -1.2 (-0.07%)TRG58.22▼ -3.1 (-0.05%)UNITY27.49▲ 0.06 (0.00%)WTL1.39▲ 0.01 (0.01%)

Court grills NAB on Maryam’s link to Avenfield properties

Share
Tweet
WhatsApp
Share on Linkedin
[tta_listen_btn]

The Islamabad High Court on Tuesday asked the National Accountability Bureau (NAB) to provide “documental evidence” related to the involvement of PML-N Vice President Maryam Nawaz in the purchase of the Avenfield properties in London.

A two-judge IHC bench, comprising Justice Aamer Farooq and Justice Mohsin Akhtar Kayani, resumed the hearing on appeals of Maryam Nawaz and her husband Captain (retd) Mohammad Safdar against their conviction in the Avenfield properties case.

During the course of the proceedings, the court stated that NAB will have to “prove though documental evidence how Maryam Nawaz became complicit by sighing a trust deed in 2006 related to a property purchased in 1993.”

The two-member bench also ordered the anti-graft watchdog to prove Nawaz Sharif’s link with the London properties and offshore companies owned by him.

Justice Farooq asked the NAB prosecutor to briefly apprise the court that about the charges against the accused.

At this, the NAB prosecutor said that Maryam was booked on the charges of supporting Nawaz Sharif in accumulating assets beyond his source of income.

The judge asked: “You said that Nawaz Sharif bought the properties in 1993, then how did she assist him in 2006?”

The judge remarked that the case cannot continue on the basis of an assumption, adding that it has to look at facts.

Meanwhile, the court adjourned the hearing till September 29. The NAB prosecutor will continue his arguments at the next hearing.

 

Related Posts

Get Alerts