Disqualification case: SC dissatisfied with record submitted by Imran, Tareen

ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court (SC) on Tuesday termed the record submitted by Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf Chairman Imran Khan inconsistent and incomplete, and remarked that PTI General Secretary Jehangir Tareen also failed to submit details of tax paid on land, and other record in the court. The court remarked that the agricultural land lease papers, submitted by Jehangir Tareen, appear to be fake, according to the media reports.

The apex court adjourned the hearing of the case regarding offshore companies of Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) General Secretary Jehangir Tareen till Wednesday (today).

A three-member SC bench, headed by Chief Justice Mian Saqib Nisar, and comprising Justice Umar Ata Bandial and Justice Faisal Arab, heard the case, filed by Pakistan Muslim League-N (PML-N) leader Hanif Abbasi. The petitioner sought disqualification of PTI Chairman Imran Khan and Secretary General Jehangir Tareen over non-disclosure of their assets, existence of offshore companies as well as the PTI being a foreign-aided party.

The court noted that the money trail, submitted by Imran Khan regarding a sum of nearly 100,000 pounds, was inconsistent and incomplete. A day earlier, Imran Khan had submitted additional documents to the apex court, which had sought a money trail of nearly 100,000 pounds.

As he submitted the documents before the court, Imran backtracked on his earlier position that approximately 99,000 pounds had been spent on legal fees and associated costs. Instead, he had claimed that the amount had only initially been retained in the bank account of Niazi Services Ltd but parts of it were later remitted to him by the company.

The chief justice remarked that the record of the amount was being submitted before the court in pieces and was inconsistent. He noted that Imran had not yet submitted any record with the court to help determine whether or not the amount had been spent as the legal fees.

Justice Bandial remarked that no record had been provided by Imran Khan regarding 27,000 pounds, out of the total sum, yet.Imran’s counsel, Advocate Naeem Bukhari, told the court that on May 26, 2003, the PTI chief’s former wife, Jemima Khan, had transferred 93,000 pounds to Imran for the purchase of Bani Gala property.

He added that the amount was received by Imran in parts; he first received 40,000 pounds and then 42,000 pounds.The court ordered the petitioner Hanif Abbasi to file his response with the bench.

Advocate Sikandar Mohmand, counsel for Jehangir Tareen, told the bench that his client had submitted all the records pertaining to 18,566 acres of land, which Tareen had acquired through a lease.

The bench told the counsel that his client was yet to submit ‘khusrabandi’ and ‘malia’ records, which the bench had sought during a hearing on Oct 5, along with other relevant revenue records, showing how much money Tareen paid to the lessor to get lease of 18,566 acres of land in 2010 as well as evidence proving that he had earned around Rs1.6 billion agriculture income from the said land.

Justice Bandial remarked that Tareen did not submit details of tax paid on land.The lawyer told the court that records of the tax paid by Tareen on water and electricity had been submitted in the court. He stated that the owner of the land, and not his client, was liable to pay taxes on the land.

The chief justice asked if there was any other evidence of payment to the landowner, as the payment was made through cross cheques. Upon this, the counsel replied that the landowners did not want the issue of lease to be placed on record, so the payment was made through cross cheques.

The CJ question: “As the landowners have entered into a contract with your client for leasing out their land and they are also receiving payments against the lease, then why they are hesitating in registering them with the relevant authorities.”

The CJ asked the counsel to prove through any sort of documents that Jehangir Tareen was farming on leased land. He remarked that the lease documents submitted by the respondent appear to be fake.

“Whether you want us to call the revenue officer of the area or order constitution of a commission to look into the practice of lease in the area,” the CJ observed.The CJ also expressed his astonishment over payment through cross cheques to the landowners, saying that usually no one makes payments through cross cheques.