The Islamabad High Court on Monday dismissed former Chairman SECP Zafar Hijazi's petition to quash an FIR registered against him for allegedly tampering with the record pertaining to Sharifs' companies. A single bench of IHC comprising Justice Mohsin Akhtar Kayani announced the decision which he had earlier reserved after hearing the arguments of both the sides.
Zafar Hijazi filed his petition through counsel Syed Ishfaq Hussain Naqvi and cited federation through Ministry of Interior, FIA through its director general and station house officer (SHO), Special Investigation Unit (SIU) Islamabad, as respondents.
The former SECP chairman stated in his petition that a probe against a company namely Chaudhry Sugar Mills Limited was initiated in the year 2011 on two fold allegations, namely the money laundering and investigation under Section 263 of the Companies Ordinance, 1984 for probing compliance of international accounting standard (IAS 19) regarding employees benefits and receivables of Rs 121 million and thus two separate files were opened for said two actions (money laundering& routine examination) in the SECP.
He informed the court that the second file pertaining to the routine examination of the affairs of the company under section 263 of the Companies Ordinance, 1984 (now repealed) was not formally closed through a proper note due to an omission. The said fact was admitted and acknowledged by the concerned officials who attributed the same to a bona fide omission or inadvertence.
He added that the said proceedings were initiated, conducted and withdrawn by the concerned officials of the SECP prior to the appointment of the petitioner as chairman SECP in December 2014. The petitioner had neither supervised the said proceedings nor had any remote concern with the said proceedings.
Later, he maintained that the media highlighted the issue of money laundering and the concerned officials were asked to prepare a briefing while in the course of preparation, the said omission was revealed. The concerned officials inserted the note in the second file pertaining to proceedings under section 263 of the repealed Ordinance but the same was dated as 14-01-2013. The petitioner, however, was kept in dark as to the insertion of a backdated note in the second file.
The petitioner said that the officials of SECP who had initiated the proceedings, conducted the same, closed the said proceedings and added the said ante dated note. The JIT in the Panama Papers case started probing the said note while those involved, falsely blamed the petitioner, to save their skin while the said persons accused the petitioner that the said note was added on his instruction.
He continued that the enquiry was directed by the apex court to probe the said note and in this regard a team of FIA was appointed to conduct the enquiry and submit report. A report was submitted by the FIA, after conclusion of the probe, to the Supreme Court whereby the lodging of FIR against the petitioner was recommended.
Comments
Comments are closed.