Citing the 2002 Zahida Sattar case, Moonis Elahi said he had been adversely affected by the Aug 8 order as the investigation had been entrusted to a person who was biased against him and his family because of personal and political reasons. – Photo by PPI

ISLAMABAD: Moonis Elahi --- the son of former Punjab chief minister Chaudhry Pervaiz Elahi and who has been implicated in the multi-billion-rupee National Insurance Company Limited corruption case --- filed in the Supreme Court on Thursday a petition seeking review of its Aug 8 verdict which had quashed the suspension order of FIA Additional Director General Zafar Qureshi and asked him to resume investigation into the scam.

“It is most respectfully prayed that the review petition be accepted and the impugned order dated August 8 may kindly be reviewed to the extent of directing Zafar Ahmed Qureshi, FIA Additional DG, to carry out investigation in the cases against the petitioner and to complete the same expeditiously,” the petition said.

Moved by former law minister Babar Awan on behalf of Moonis Elahi, the petition requested the court to transfer the NICL probe to a fair, impartial and independent officer other than Zafar Qureshi who could investigate without “bias or any preconceived and unfounded apprehension”.

Moonis Elahi, who is under house-arrest, contended that he was condemned unheard and no opportunity of hearing was given to him before passing the Aug 8 order.

Citing the 2002 Zahida Sattar case, he said he had been adversely affected by the Aug 8 order as the investigation had been entrusted to a person who was biased against him and his family because of personal and political reasons.

The petitioner also cited the Feb 17 statement of Zafar Qureshi before the apex court that he was being threatened with dire consequences and that if he met an unnatural death, PML-Q chief Chaudhry Shujaat Hussain, Pervaiz Elahi, Moonis Elahi, Chaudhry Wajahat, Maj (retd) Habibullah Warraich and Mohsin Habib Warraich would be responsible for that.

The statement proved the bias of Zafar Qureshi against him, the petitioner contended, adding that the court had held in so many cases that justice must not only be done but also must manifestly be seen to be done.