SHC upholds MQM-London man’s money laundering conviction

KARACHI: The Sindh High Court (SHC) on Monday dismissed an appeal filed by a Muttahida Qaumi Movement-London (MQM-L) activist against his conviction by an anti-terrorism court (ATC) in a money laundering case.

Raeesuddin, alias Mama, was sentenced to five years in prison by an ATC for money laundering, collecting funds for terrorism and concealing information.According to the prosecution, the appellant, who was formerly a purchase officer of the Karachi Development Authority, had numerous transactions in his salary account.

The prosecution said that it was later found that he was raising funds for the banned MQM-L, which he had ties with, and he was using the collected amount to fund terrorism. According to the prosecution’s claim, the appellant had collected Rs2.5 million.

The appellant’s counsel said his client was falsely implicated in the case, he had not raised funds for money laundering and he had no connection with terrorism.He said that no evidence had been cited regarding the Rs2.5 million that had been allegedly raised by the appellant, and no evidence had been produced that he was working for the MQM-L.

The additional prosecutor general said the appellant had been involved in 18 cases of heinous crimes, and he had admitted depositing the amount in his bank account.After hearing the arguments of the counsels, an SHC division bench comprising Justice Mohammad Karim Khan Agha and Justice Khadim Hussain Tunio said the appellant had failed to provide any explanation about the multiple transactions that were unrelated to his salary, and he could not deny the prosecution’s suggestions regarding the money being laundered to fund terrorism.

The court said that the admission of appellant of receiving the cheque for official work provided no aid to his case because he failed to disclose what type of work he was involved in.The court also said that the deposition of all the prosecution witnesses were consistent and in line with each other. The court added that the prosecution had proved the guilt of the appellant beyond any reasonable doubt, and so the bench maintained the conviction and the sentence awarded to him by the trial court.