Fawad Hasan’s release on bail: LHC knocks down all 4 charges for lack of evidence

ISLAMABAD: The Lahore High Court (LHC), while granting bail to former senior bureaucrat Fawad Hasan Fawad (FHF), has knocked down all the four grounds and charges leveled by the National Accountability Bureau (NAB) against him.

In its detailed order, which remained unreported or was underplayed, the two-judge bench comprising Justice Muhammad Tariq Abbasi and Justice Chaudhry Mushtaq Ahmad dealt with every allegation one by one, nailing them altogether.

One, according to the judgment, no asset of FHF beyond means can be dug out by the NAB and highlighted in the reference filed in an accountability court of Lahore against him.

Two, the value of the property was described by the NAB as Rs500 million but in the reference the worth was stated as Rs78.5 million. Nothing has been brought on record to show that it was purchased or acquired through any money paid by FHF, the former principal secretary of ex-Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif.

Three, it was stated that FHF’s wife Mst. Rubab Hassan, brother Waqar Hassan and sister-in-law Mst. Anjum Hassan, being the owner of Fehmida Yaqoob Contraction (FYC) Company (Pvt) Ltd., owned a plaza, known as the “The Mall” Rawalpindi, worth Rs5 billion. Firstly, no concern or nexus of FHF with the FYC and the plaza has been established on record. Additionally, the NAB while assessing whole of his and his family’s assets as Rs1,089 million, had rebutted this price of the property.

Four, fourteen bank accounts, maintained by FHF and his family members, were alleged but the reference is silent to that extent.

The bail order also stated that admittedly in the reference no evidence has been annexed, suggesting any property in the name of FHF. Similarly, there was no cogent or convincing evidence on record that FHF has purchased any property from any vendor and got it transferred in the name of these relatives as benamidar.

The judgment noted that undisputedly these relatives of FHF are directors/ shareholders in FYC and M/s Sprint Services (Pvt) Ltd, who are also owner of certain assets but they had categorically alleged that they acquired the assets by their own means and not through FHF in any manner whatsoever.

Furthermore, NAB has badly failed to bring on record any evidence to the effect that actually for purchase of these properties, the payments were made to the vendors by FHF.

FHF’s relatives, having these properties, have also been arrayed as accused in the reference without any arrest as such they are appearing in the proceedings of the reference while at large. But FHF without cogent and convincing evidence/ material regarding any link or nexus with these properties and business owned by the co-accused, has been arrested even at inquiry stage.

The judges noted that on one hand are these facts and circumstances whereas on the other is FHF’s confinement for the last 19 months without any progress in the case having been noticed. Till date even charge has not been framed against FHF and his co-accused. Consequently, FHF could not be kept behind bars for an indefinite period.