Three payments were made for one property, observes SC

ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court (SC) on Thursday observed that three payments were made for one property.

A three-member bench of the apex court, headed by Chief Justice Mian Saqib Nisar and comprising Justice Umer Ata Bandyal and Justice Faisal Arab, heard the petition filed by PML-N leader Hanif Abbasi, seeking disqualification of Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) General Secretary Jahangir Tareen, alleging that he had established offshore companies in the name of his children, shared gifts worth over Rs1.6 billion among family members, and was involved in insider trading in the shares of United Sugar Mills Limited in 2005.

In pursuance of the court’s earlier order, Sikandar Bashir Mohmand, the counsel for Jahangir Tareen, submitted before the court that his client had established an offshore company in British Virgin Islands in 2014 and his four children, including three daughters, were the real beneficial owners of the said company. Sikandar, who made his debut for arguing in the Supreme Court, however, could not provide the trust deed, saying that he was in the process of contacting the company to get information about the trust deed.

Chief Justice Mian Saqib Nisar told the counsel that the children of his client must be having the proof of the said trust for being the beneficial owners of the offshore company.

“I am trying my level best to get the details about the trust deed and I will be able to get it in a week,” Sikandar replied. He first sought one week and later on 10 days which the court allowed.

Akram Sheikh, who was also the counsel for Hanif Abbasi in a matter relating to Imran Khan’s case, however, contended that they have no Imran Khan’s case, however, contended that they have no objection over the time, adding that how much time the court may give to the respondent’s counsel but he must ensure that the documents or details pertaining to trust deed should be from authentic source.

Sikandar told the court that he has submitted that Jahangir Tareen established Shiny View Limited offshore company in British Virgin Island in 2011, saying the company has one share without any power value.

He said that the share is held by EFG Nominee Limited and the company is in Jersy, adding that with a Random Trust settled by his client on  May 5, 2011. “By settled I mean the author of the company is Jahangir Tareen but his four children, son Ali Tareen and daughters Mehar Khan Tareen, Sehar Tareen and Mariam Tareen, were the real beneficial owners of the offshore company,” the counsel said.

On a court query, he said that the Shani View Company has a residential property but its address is yet to be known. He further informed the court that his client Jahangir Tareen contributed over £3.5 million to the trust as a gift to his children through banking channels and that the amount has also been shown in their wealth records.

To a query, the counsel submitted that all the children are fully independent, adding that Ali Tareen is married having children.  To a court query about the residential property, the counsel said that Jahangir Tareen gave £2.5 million, and again instalments of £5 million and $1.1 million were paid.

On this Justice Umaer Ata Bandyal asked the counsel to tell the date of purchase, observing that three payments were made for one property.

The chief justice said that the court wanted to give the parties an opportunity to submit documents. The counsel for Jahangir Tareen told the court that he will also submit the more documents on offshore company.

The court then directed the counsel to submit the details in 10 days and ruled that the case will be re-listed. Earlier, during the course of proceedings, the court was informed that a person whose gardener and chef were possessing shares of some Rs70 million can be asked to give his explanation. 

Azid Nafees, counsel for Hanif Abbasi, while continuing his arguments, contended that during the by-election in 2015, Jahangir Tareen, while filing his nomination papers, showed different tax returns.

He also contended that the respondent had not shown his actual income in the tax returns, earning form the agriculture land, and misguided the authorities concerned as well as concealing the facts from his voters, hence Jahangir Tareen remained no more Sadiq and Ameen and liable to be disqualified from the membership of Parliament.

Justice Faisal Arab questioned that every parliamentarian might be associated with some business and if there is any mater of embezzlement in his record, can his qualification as a lawmaker be challenged before the Supreme Court?

“The constitutional condition of Sadiq and Ameen and disqualification of a lawmaker is linked to the declaration of court of law,” Justice Faisal Arab added. Akram Sheikh replied that a person whose gardener and chef were possessing shares of some Rs70 million can be asked to give his explanation.

Azid Nafees, counsel for Hanif Abbasi, told the court that Jahangir Tareen, being the company director with a written-off loan of some Rs40.9 million and being a defaulter, was not qualified to hold public office.

He said that the respondent had admitted to get his loan written off in 2007, adding that the loan was written off by his son-in-law who was the owner of the said company and that time he (Tareen) was the minister for industries. 

The counsel for the petitioner contended that it is the court to see as to whether after writing off the loan, Jahangir Tareen purchased the said company. He further submitted that the respondent Jahangir Tareen showed his agriculture revenue to be Rs540 million to the Federal Board of Revenue whereas the same was shown as Rs120 million to the Election Commission of Pakistan. He said the difference is of Rs420 million in 2010.