No inquiry on NAB chief's purported video yet

ISLAMABAD: The curious case of Tayyaba Farooq, the accused seen in an ignominious video with Chairman NAB Justice (R) Javed Iqbal, is entering into a decisive phase next week (March 17).

The bureau termed it a unique case of cheating public at large where Tayyaba and her husband were slapped with a NAB reference, a day later when the purported video of the alleged accused in this case was leaked.

No one knows if the NAB had started an inquiry into the video, as it raised a question mark over the bureau chief's credibility.

"Ten months passed over. No inquiry, at the moment, was underway, neither in the NAB nor in the FIA, to probe the actual controversy surrounding the issue," a credible source told Geo News.

A telephonic communiqué that recently happened between the accused and a serving officer of NAB (BS-20) suggested that the NAB administration was trying to convince the accused to destroy all material and evidence gathered against the NAB top management.

The accused has had purportedly some incriminating materials which could create problems any time for the top management of bureau, claimed the source telling about content of this communiqué to correspondent.

The Accountability Court No-I, Lahore, after carrying out around a dozen hearings, would most likely frame charges against the said accused next week (March 17).

Geo News has reviewed the case record, relevant material, interviewed legal teams of all parties (accused, complainants & the bureau) and many NAB officials to ascertain the facts of this matter as investigators were probing two private litigants who were already contesting cases of cheating against each other on the same issue in a local court.

Geo News' investigation continued to reveal that Director General (DG) NAB, Lahore Major (R) Shahzad Saleem, according to another communiqué this correspondent is familiar with, had spoken with the accused, Tayyaba, months before filing the said reference. The then deputy chairman NAB, Imtiaz Tajwar, whose role is also under question either he was in contact with the accused had asked DG NAB Lahore to look into Tayyaba’s complaint filed against individuals who are now complainants against her in the said reference.

In this communication DG NAB Lahore asked Tayyaba to bring more affected complainants against the accused and NAB to also seek further complaints in this case through publication of a notice in the press.

It's, however, not clear yet either Chairman NAB himself asked his deputy Imtiaz Tajwar to speak to DG NAB Lahore to look into Tayyaba's complaint.

DG NAB had told Tayyaba that her case could be transferred from Lahore to Islamabad if Chairman NAB wanted that. Tayyaba filed a complaint against one Azam Rashid with Chairman NAB on Jan 26, 2018.

NAB started inquiry against Azam Rashid, owner of Chiniot Housing Society, who allegedly grabbed money worth Rs320 million from 32 victims who were given bogus allotment letters. Nonetheless, one fine morning (Jan 15-16) Tayyaba and her husband Muhammad Farooq were arrested by NAB intelligence team and directly sent to jail. Five (5) months later, NAB on complaint of those who were named in Tayyaba's complaint filed a reference against her (Tayyaba). The Lahore High Court (LHC) granted bail to Tayyaba on May 2, 2019 and Farooq got bail on July 1, 2019.

The LHC while giving bail to the accused observed, "After hearing all parties, it's straight away observed that in total Rs24.44 million were allegedly received by the accused by cheating six complainants on different pretexts.

Investigation officer present before this court has not been able to bring material on record during this investigation either deliberately or intentionally. Such a negligence on the part of the investigating officer speaks volumes for high-handedness and the protracted approach adopted in the present case for obvious reasons. Unfortunately, a lot of muddling in this case has been observed against the institutional head which must have been of grave concern for the investigation officer”.

Relevant record shows that the inquiry was conducted in undue haste and later it was converted into investigation, which paved the way for filing a reference on May 24, 2019. The 630-page reference claimed that Tayyaba and her husband, along with their accomplices, used to loot innocent people by impersonating officials of secret agencies and NAB. The bureau received six complaints and the couple deprived victims of a collective sum of Rs24.44 million.

History of both the accused (Husband and wife) and the complainants showed that Farooq and his wife Tayyaba filed a complaint against Azam Rashid, owner of Chiniot Society, alleging that thirty-two (32) affected individuals had been defrauded of Rs320 million by the accused society owner. But that entire land deal was bogus. NAB had started an inquiry on that complaint.

Farooq and Tayyaba subsequently filed a case (No-15) in special court of FIA headed by Judge Rana Ishfaq Ahmed against Omar Hayat, Azam Rashid, Shamshad Jan and Hassan Zubair during August 2018. Hidayatullah filed a civil suit against Farooq and Tayyaba in Rawalpindi court of Abdul Sattar (civil judge Rawalpindi) for recovery of Rs12.4 million in July 2013. Hidayatullah also got registered a case at Naseerabad Police Station, Rawalpindi on Aug 26, 2016 against Farooq and his wife. Saba Hamid filed a civil suit against Farooq for giving bounced cheque worth Rs2 million in the district court, Jhang.

Omar Hayat, Azam Rasheed and some others got multiple cases registered against Farooq in Police Stations Civil Line, Lahore and New Ansar Kali, Defence A. Lahore and Police Stations Koral, Loralai, Aabpara, Golra, Ramna, Margallah, Tarnol, Islamabad and Police Stations in 18 Hazari, Satellite Town Jhang, Police Station Faisalabad, Police Station Chiniot City, Police Stations Airport, Naseerabad Rawalpindi, Police Station Chowa Saidan Shah, Chakwal. Majority of cases, Geo News' investigation further revealed, go either dormant or concluded.

Around two dozen hearings have been conducted so far and two judges have been transferred in this case at NAB Court-I. Judge Mushtaq Elahi who heard the case on Aug 27, Sep 13, Oct 15, Oct 29 and Dec 10 last year was prematurely transferred out before he could frame the charges against the accused persons on the next date of hearing which was fixed for January 8, 2020.

The said case is unique in NAB’s recent history that the bureau (Due to already settled laws/policy/jurisdiction) only takes up matters involving fraud/cheating public at large if the amount involved is more than Rs100 million. Besides, the accused must be a public office holder and there should be at least 50 complainants or affected individuals. Similarly, cases which do not fall within NAB’s ambit should be transferred to appropriate agency under section 18 (d) provided it (agency) has the jurisdiction to deal with the matter. "In cases below Rs100 million which can be dealt with by other agencies such as FIA, ECA we [judges] would expect NAB to send such cases to such alternate agencies for prosecution by virtue of section 18 (b) of NAO 1999,"observed Justice Ali Baqar Najafi.

“Case [is] in the court and I told you that case is sub-judice in the court of law. Kindly avoid speculations in this regard,” a NAB spokesperson said, adding "if no media has reported this then it’s a part of GEO TV’s malicious campaign against NAB."

Chairman NAB himself and the then deputy chairman Imtiaz Tajwar did not respond. The spokesperson, however, further explained that "we have filed reference after due process of law and now the case is under trial. We have arrested both husband and wife and after their arrest gave an advertisement in the press inviting applications from the persons who have been cheated by the husband and wife. In response NAB received complaints of cheating public at large. We have filed reference against husband and wife in the Accountability Court. Both are now on bail and they are facing case. Fifthly, the Ministry of Law appoints respected Judges of the Accountability Courts in the country. NAB has no role in the appointments of judges of the Accountability Courts. NAB has submitted his case before the Accountability Court which is under trial. Since the case is under trial, therefore NAB as per cannot comment on the merits of the case as per law."