LHC issues detailed judgement in Bahria Town properties auction case

ISLAMABAD: The Islamabad High Court (IHC) noted that the amendment in National Accountability Ordinance (NAO) 1999 was made on 16-08-2022, while the plea bargain agreement was admittedly approved before the amendments in NAO, 1999, which is still in field.

A division bench of the IHC comprising Chief Justice of IHC Justice Sardar Muhammad Sarfraz Dogar and Justice Muhammad Asif, on Wednesday, issued detailed judgment of his order to turn down the petitions filed against the auction of Bahria Town properties.

The judgment, authored by Justice Dogar, said convict/ Zain Malik kept returning the amount of plea bargain after the amendment in NAO. It concluded that prima facie, the convict malafidely discontinued the payment of remaining instalments in connivance with the surety on the pretext of amendment in order to refrain himself from returning the amount gained illegally.

Apex court rejects stay order plea on auction of Bahria Town properties

The court noted that as per Section 33E of the NAO, 1999 any fine or other sum due under this Ordinance, or as determined to be due by a Court shall be recoverable as arrears of land revenue.

In this case admittedly, the determined amount has been approved by the Court, which is due against the petitioner being surety of the convict Zain Malik; therefore, the same can be recovered as arrears of land revenue by the NAB.

The court noted that the record shows that Zain Malik was admittedly accused in three references and three investigations. He offered to return the illegal gains acquired by him in the commission of offence.

The chairman NAB considered the offer of plea bargain along with affidavit of Zain Malik and determined his total joint liability of over Rs9 billion (Rs9,050,554,034) including the liability in reference No 02/2019.

Zain Malik requested for payment in instalments, which was also considered by chairman NAB and accepted the offer of plea bargain. In this regard Rs1 billion was adjusted as down payment in six different cases, whereas, the remaining liability was agreed to be paid in three years.

The statement of accused Zain Malik was recorded through Skype/ Video link facility from London, who was duly identified by his counsel. The statement of Col Khalilur Rehman (retired), vice Chief Executive of Bahria Town was also recorded, who acknowledged the sureties against the remaining liability in six different case including the reference No 02/2019.

The judgment mentioned that on the application of respondent, the properties were attached vide orders dated 08.01.2024, 12.01.2024 and 19.01.2024 and the claim of the petitioner is that petitioner is independent juristic person and is not responsible for any act or deed of any of its shareholders and that it has never been an accused nor was declared proclaimed offender in reference No 19/ 2023 titled “The State vs. Imran Ahmed Khan Niazi and others”; therefore, the properties, which are statedly belonging to the petitioner, could not have been attached by the Accountability Court-1, Islamabad.

The judge observed that the Section 87 to 89 of the CrPC provide attachment of the property of an absconding accused as a coercive measure to compel his appearance. In this regard, as per Section 87 of the CrPC, when a court has reasons to believe that a person, against whom a warrant has been issued, is deliberately avoiding arrest, it may issue a proclamation requiring the accused to appear at a specified place and time.

Copyright Business Recorder, 2025