Restoring Dar’s bank accounts and other assets.
The order from 2017 that confiscated Dar’s assets has been withdrawn by the Accountability Court.
ISLAMABAD: After the National Accountability Bureau (NAB) Lahore bench sent a letter requesting the return of the minister’s assets, an accountability court on Saturday ordered the restoration of Finance Minister Ishaq Dar’s accounts and properties.
Judge Muhammad Bashir of the Accountability Court made the ruling, with Prosecutor Afzal Qureshi representing the state and Advocate Qazi Misbah ul Hassan representing Ishaq Dar.
The 2017 order to seize the finance minister’s property, including his home in Lahore, and to freeze his bank accounts was rescinded, according to the accountability court’s written ruling.
In the case of Rana Muhammad Ramzan v. The State, the petitioner “came late before the Court, faced trial, and was cleared of the accusation,” according to Dar’s attorney.
The petitioner “could not be deemed to have absconded or concealed himself,” it was said.
Dar’s attorney said that since the immovable property was ordered to have been used by the petitioner in these circumstances, the confiscation of it was not warranted.
The prosecutor said that since the defendant entered the case to stand trial, the criminal case against him was concluded, and the court may now issue the proper order in accordance with the law.
Records showed, in accordance with the order, that the minister attended court and participated in the trial. His petition was therefore approved and his property was returned to him in accordance with the law.
Additionally, “after the revisions made in the NAO, 1999 retrospectively by the National Accountability Amendment Acts, 2022, the criminal proceedings in the main case against him were closed due to lack of jurisdiction.”
After the NAB statute was changed in September of last year, accountability courts all throughout the nation started returning corruption references to the NAB chairman because the accused could no longer be tried because the courts lacked financial jurisdiction in the cases.
