Park Lane case: Prosecution witness tells AC he did not produce document against Zardari

ISLAMABAD: A prosecution witness on Wednesday told Accountability Court that he has not produced any document before it in the Park Lane case against former president Asif Ali Zardari and others, showing that M/s Parthenon is the front company (straw borrower) of the M/s Park Lane (Private) Limited.

The National Accountability Bureau (NAB) witness and joint registrar Securities and Exchange Commission of Pakistan (SECP) Ahsan Aslam, while testifying before Accountability Court-II judge Muhammad Azam Khan in the Park Lane case said that it is correct that he has not produced any document showing M/s Parthenon is sham and a front company of M/s Park Lane.

The witness said this, when he was asked by Zardari’s counsel Farooq H Naek that did you produce any document before the court that shows that Parthenon Company is the front company of Park Lane during the cross examination.

However, according to the NAB, Zardari and others had allegedly embezzled funds obtained for M/s Parthenon (Private) Limited and M/s Park Lane (Private) Limited, which inflicted losses of Rs3.77 billion to the national exchequer.

As per the joint investigation team (JIT)’s report on fake accounts, it was found that the M/s Parthenon was merely a “front company” (straw borrower) of M/s Park Lane (Private) Limited.

M/s Parthenon had no independent business when it entered into a joint venture (JV) with the M/s Park Lane (October 2009), it said.

During the hearing, the witness further said that it is correct that M/s Park Lane and M/s Parthenon companies are registered companies with the SECP and both the companies are still registered with the SECP.

It is correct that it is not unlawful for companies to have common directors.

I do not know if the property of Park Lane is mortgaged with the bank for loan disbursements to Parthenon, he said.

The witness said that it is correct that mortgage of property of Park Lane for disbursements of loan of Park Lane has been registered under the Company Ordinance.

It is correct that the SECP has never issued any notice to Park Lane and/or to Parthenon Company questioning the valuation of mortgaged property, he said.

He said that it is correct that the loan disbursed to Parthenon Company is secured as far as the SECP is concerned.

The prosecution witness said that it is correct that he has not produced any document before the court that shows that the SECP ever objected to the resignation of Zardari from the directorship of M/s Park Lane (Pvt) Ltd.

The witness said that it is correct that Form-A annual return of the company having share capital pertaining to Park Lane dated July 15, 2008, in which accused Zardari is shown as one of the directors.

It is correct that he has seen the documents dated August 18, 2008 which is the resignation of the accused, Zardari from directorship of Park Lane with effect from 11 September 2008.

He said that it is correct that the document annual return dated December 13, 2009 of the company has shares capital pertaining to Park Lane in which Zardari was not shown as director.

It is correct that Form-A dated October 29, 2009 the particular of directors pertaining to Park Lane which shows that Zardari ceased to be director Park Lane on September 11, 2008, he said.

To another question the witness said that it is correct that Form 29 mentioned that fees has been paid through bank challan amounting to Rs4,200 vide receipt no M2009 037635.

Aslam told the court that he comes from Karachi to Islamabad for recording of evidence before the court.

I came by air from Karachi and stay back and stayed in a hotel during my stay, he said.

When he was asked by Naek who pays his boarding and lodging expenses, the witness replied that the SECP bears all the expenses of travelling, boarding, and lodging.

I used the services of Careem (a private company) for coming from a hotel in Islamabad to the court, he said.

He said that the documents which he has produced in the instant case were at Karachi. I handed over the documents to the investigation officer at Islamabad, he said.

The witness said that he had joined the SECP on February 25, 2008 as assistant director Securities Market Division.

I became deputy director in the same department on July 1, 2009, he said, adding that during the said posting my duties involved looking after trading watch of markets and also inspection of brokers.

He said that he remained on the same posting till September 2012, after that he was posted in the NAB on deputation.

I remained on deputation till March, 2014.

On my repatriation as I was posted as Deputy Registrar company registration office. After my repatriation, I mainly worked as a coordinator dealing with various agencies for providing them information, he said.

He said that the documents, which he has produced in the court, are not authored by him and he was not custodian of those documents.

At the start of the hearing, Zardari and other accused’s counsel filed separate exemption applications seeking one-day exemption of their clients which the court approved.

The court adjourned the hearing of the case till February 8th, and the defence counsel will continue cross examination of the witness.

Copyright Business Recorder, 2021