LAHORE: The judge of a special court (Central-I) on Monday observed that none of the prosecution witnesses levelled allegations of bribe, kickbacks or corrupt practices against Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif and his son Punjab Chief Minister Hamza Shehbaz in the Rs16 billion money laundering case instituted by the Federal Investigation Agency (FIA).

“Prima facie, allegations of gratification, corrupt practice, abuse of authority, kickbacks and [receiving] commission require further probe during trial as at this stage cogent evidence is not available,” judge Ijaz Hassan Awan observed in his detailed order on confirmation of pre-arrest bails of Mr Shehbaz, Mr Hamza and other suspects in the case.

The judge had on June 11 allowed the petitions of the suspects and confirmed their pre-arrest bails subject to furnishing of bonds.

In his 22-page written order, the judge notes that the FIA registered the FIR on Nov 14, 2020, but did not submit any interim challan till Dec 12, 2021.

He says the main suspects -- Shehbaz and Hamza -- were included in investigation when they were already in jail in connection with a reference of the National Accountability Bureau (NAB), but their arrests were affected in the FIA’s case.

“There has been a complete silence on part of the FIA for a period of about five months since the investigation team visited the Central Jail,” the judge adds.

The judge observes that the FIA issued call-up notices to the suspects after they were released on bail in the NAB reference by the Lahore High Court.

He states that this prima facie shows that the prosecution wanted another arrest of the petitioners (Shehbaz and Hamza) but after their release on bail in the accountability reference.

“Prima facie this shows mala fide on the part of the FIA,” the judge maintains.

The judge observes that in the FIR, it has been alleged that a politician gave a cheque worth Rs14 million personally to Mr Shehbaz in lieu of party (PML-N) ticket.

However, he says, neither the name of the said politician has been mentioned in the FIR, nor any documentary evidence in support of the allegations is available on the record.

The judge notes that the FIR claims that the politician failed to make any statement in writing and no politician has been made witness in the case.

The judge also observes that initially the figure of Rs25 billion was mentioned in the FIR as alleged amount of money laundering, but later it was reduced to Rs16bn after deleting some bank accounts, earlier mentioned in the FIR.

The judge states that the FIR claims that Mushtaq Cheeniwala, a co-suspect, provided secret ledgers to the agency as a proof to show that money from undisclosed sale of sugar was deposited into the disputed bank accounts.

However, the judge says, the alleged secret ledgers have not been made part of the investigation.

About the statements of 66 persons, whose cheques were deposited in the disputed accounts, the judge observes that none of the said witnesses directly made any statement against Shehbaz and Hamza about the deposit and withdrawal of the amounts in question.

He says the challan shows that 100 depositors joined the investigation, whereas statements of 64 were recorded and that too were related to an amount of Rs670m against the claim of the case amount of Rs16bn.

The judge holds that none of the depositors nominated Shehbaz in their statements recorded under section 161 of CrPC.

“Moreover, the said statements do not spell out any bribe, kickbacks or commission etc,” the judge adds.

He maintains that the statements made before the FIA investigators are not admissible evidence and cannot be used against the suspects.

The judge observes that the prosecution could not collect any document showing any share, nexus, of PM Shehbaz with the management of Ramzan Sugar Mills as he is neither a shareholder or a director of the mills.

As far as Hamza is concerned, the judge says, although he is chief executive officer of the sugar mills but prima facie the prosecution has failed to produce any evidence showing that the disputed bank accounts were opened and operated on his instruction.

The judge observes that there is no allegation against the petitioners about the misuse of the concession of pre-arrest bail as they regularly appeared before the court except two or three occasions due to Covid-19 and official engagement.

The judge also notes that both Shehbaz and Hamza are already facing same charges for the same period from 2008 to 2018 in the NAB reference pending before a trial court.

The judge explains that as per the letter and spirit of sections 3, 7, 4 of the Anti Money Laundering Act 2010, mischief of money laundering may attract only when money involves proceeds of crime.

He says a necessary element of the offence of money laundering is commission of a predicate offence.

“The execution of this offence gives birth to the proceeds of crime, the movement of which attracts the criminal misconduct of money laundering, therefore, without the commission of predicate offence there can be no offence of money laundering,” the judge observes, relying on a Supreme Court judgement.

The judge says the investigating officer did not record any police diary till to date, suggesting that arrest of the petitioners is required by him for further investigation.

Other co-suspects whose pre-arrest bails have also been confirmed, include Muhammad Aslam, Azhar Abbas, Khizar Hayat, Iqrar Hussain, Muhammad Anwar, Muhammad Yaseen, Touqiruddin, Zafar Iqbal Anjum, Tanvirul Haq, Kashif Majeed, Masroor Anwar, Muhammad Usman, Zahid Ali and Aurangzeb Butt.

The order clarifies that the observations made for the grant of bail are only tentative in nature and would have no effect on the merits of the trial.

Published in Dawn, June 14th, 2022