The same bench on December 24 at Lahore Registry had directed counsels for former President Asif Ali Zardari and his sister Faryal Talpur, Omni Group and Bahria Town, including Malik Riaz and Zain Malik, to file replies in five days. The court had directed Chief Executive Bahria Town Malik Riaz as well as Zain Malik to appear before it in-person on the said date.
Following the JIT report, the federal government had put 172 suspects including the Pakistan Peoples Party Parliamentarians (PPPP) President Asif Ali Zardari, his sister Faryal Talpur and PPP Chairman Bilawal Bhutto Zardari on the Exit Control List (ECL) for their alleged involvement in money laundering and fake bank accounts case.
Anver Majeed and AG Majeed, who have filed the reply through counsels Shahid Hamid and Ayesha Hamid, stated that the material/documents /statements, including account statements, STRs and CTRs statedly examined by the JIT account the statements of 924 individuals separately recorded by the JIT, etc, have not been provided to them.
They are, therefore, not able to make any comprehensive reply as the JIT report merely makes allegations but does not include the material/documents/statements in support of these allegations, the counsels contended.
The applicants are entirely innocent of each and every one of the (false) allegations made in the JIT report and its executive summary. There is no lawful basis for the JIT request that the allegations against the applicants be referred to NAB. It is submitted with utmost request that stamp of approval given by this august court to the JIT report in the manner sought by the JIT would be violative of the inter alia the applicants' guaranteed fundamental rights under the Article 10-A of Constitution.
Zain Malik maintained that the JIT finding is without any basis and it appear that no effort was made to conduct an in-dept inquiry of the fact related to Bahria Icon Tower. It has been alleged in the JIT that the Tower encroaches upon the land of Bagh Ibn-e-Qasim and thus there is land grabbing and that there is some interest of Zardari Group in that project.
The reply said that it is the fundamental principal of the law as incorporated in Section 24-A of the General Clauses Act that all public functionaries must act reasonably, fairly, justly and not on their personal whims.
The JIT conclusion that safe holding was 'Benami' for Asif Ali Zardari is devoid of any force and is a mere concoction of the part of the JIT having no nexus with actual situation. He dispelled the notion that Asif Ali Zardari was in any way connected with the land which vests with Galaxy Construction Company (Pvt) Ltd. In 2005 Farakh Shehzad and Amir Malik, sons-in-law of Malik Riaz Hussain, became 50 percent shareholders in Galaxy Construction Company (Pvt) Ltd.
Zain contended that the JIT finding that Rs 1.22 billion were supposed to be laundered as kickbacks to Zardari Group is misreading of the Joint Venture Opal 225 project agreement.
The JIT conclusion that Dinshaw, on whose name 50% shareholdings of the company are, was the front man of Asif Ali Zardari, is misperception as Dinshaw owned the property much before Zardari appeared on the scene. Asif Zardari became a political entity after his marriage with Mohtarma Benazir Bhutto which was held in 1987. Galaxy Construction (Pvt) Ltd was the owner of the property many years before that event. Zain clarified that he/Bahria Town has no concern as the disposal of the amount advanced to Omni Group as responsibility for the squarely lies on the said group. He prayed that adverse findings against him and Bahria Town be deleted from the JIT report in the interest of justice, equity and fair play.