ISLAMABAD: An Accountability Court (AC) on Tuesday rejected the applications of former  president Asif Ali Zardari and his sister Faryal Talpur, seeking A-class and  extra facilities in prison during judicial remand in fake accounts cases.

National Accountability Bureau (NAB)’s Deputy Prosecutor General (DPG)  Sardar Muzafar Abbasi pleaded before the court that the petitions were not maintainable as the accused should approach Inspector General (IG) Prisons,  Punjab — a relevant forum for their requests.

He stated that the government had removed the rule of A and B classes in  prisons and had replaced it with ‘better class.’ However, one had to request  IG Prisons to get this facility, who was bound to refer the matter to the Home Department for a decision.

Abbasi informed the court that the prisoners of ‘better class’ were also  provided facilities like a common prisoners but they could avail the extra  facilities at their own expenditures. He prayed the court to dismiss the  applications of the accused as this matter was not relevant to the court.

Earlier, Zardari’s Counsel Sardar Latif Khosa contended before AC-I  Judge Muhammad Bashir that since his client had been holding the president  office and currently he was member Parliament, the Constitution allowed  him extra facilities for life time. The former president was suffering from  cardiac problems and this court had also allowed him to keep an attendant  during NAB custody, he argued.

Farouk H. Naek argued that this was not an administrative issue, rather  it was the authority of the court to grant his clients additional facilities in jail.

He stated, “We were not begging from administration but demanding our  rights in accordance with the Constitution.”

He said that Faryal Talpur had been holding different offices including  elected MNA, two times mayor and currently she was also member Sindh  Assembly. He also prayed the court to grant a transit remand to Talpur  so that she could attend Sindh Assembly session.

The NAB DAG objected on the request and pleaded that there was a  different mechanism for transit remand and the accused couldn’t file an  application to the court in this regard.

The Speaker used to issue orders for the Home Department for this  purpose which was enough for the authority concerned, he said and  argued that this request was also non-maintainable.

He said that the suspect had submitted no request to the Home  Department in this regard.