ISLAMABAD: The counsel for Maryam Nawaz concluded his arguments before the Islamabad High Court in the Avenfield Apartment reference on Thursday, but the National Accountability Bureau (NAB) once again sought an adjournment for 15 days.

An IHC division bench, however, asked the bureau to conclude its reply by Sept 20. The court will then take a decision on Ms Nawaz’s appeal, which has been pending since 2018.

The bureau has been seeking adjournments in the case on one ground or another since November last year.

The bench hearing the case consists of Justice Aamer Farooq and Justice Mohsin Akhtar Kayani.

When Amjad Pervaiz, Maryam Nawaz’s counsel, concluded his arguments against her conviction and left the rostrum to the prosecution, Sardar Muzaffar Abbasi, the NAB’s deputy prosecutor general, told the court that one of his team members was not in attendance.

He requested the court to adjourn further hearing for two weeks. The court first adjourned the hearing to Sept 22, but later brought it forward to Sept 20 after it was informed that PTI chief Imran Khan was also due to appear before an IHC bench on the date first mentioned.

The defence counsel, in his concluding arguments, said that “the prosecution has solely relied on the report of Robert Radley, a ‘so called’ expert who was “neither a computer geek nor had any expertise in fonts”.

He pointed out that Ms Nawaz had been convicted on the basis of a trust deed, which the expert argued, was prepared in Calibri, a font which was “not commercially available” when the document was executed.

However, Amjad Pervaiz further said that during cross-examination, Mr Radley admitted the font was available on a trial basis and he had already downloaded and used this font before its formal launch.

The counsel argued that Mr Radley’s report had no “evidential value”. Even otherwise, Mr Pervaiz added, it could have been used to corroborate the primary evidence. But the joint investigation team (JIT) treated it as primary evidence in itself in contradiction of the law laid down by the superior courts, the counsel observed.

Amjad Pervaiz further said the JIT did not record the statement of British solicitor Jeremy Freeman, in whose presence the trust deed was executed.

Explaining the trust deed, Mr Pervaiz said it was an internal matter of the Sharif family. Ms Nawaz has become the caretaker of the property for a short time till the shares of Avenfield Apartments were registered in the name of her brother Hussain Nawaz, he said.

According to Mr Pervaiz, there was no legal requirement of registering the trust deed before the British authorities and the document expired automatically once the property was registered in the name of Hussain Nawaz.

The court inquired whether the prosecution had submitted the original trust deed before the trial court. Mr Pervaiz replied only a photocopy of the document was produced as evidence. “This is against the law of evidence (Qanoon-i-Shahadat)”.

Justice Farooq remarked that no such document could have been used as evidence.

Published in Dawn, September 16th, 2022