Low Graphics Site
White bar
Daily SectionMarker

Misc SectionMarker

Horoscope Recipes Weekly SectionMarker

Weekly SectionMarker

Pakistan's Internet Magazine
Herald
Dawn GroupMarker

Archive, Search, Feedback & HelpMarker

Dawn Classified



FrontPage National International Local Business KSE Forex Sports Editorial Opinion Letters Features Today's Cartoon TV Guide Cowasjee Ayaz Irfan Hussain Review Dawn Magazine Young World Images Dawn Group Subscription To Advertise

DINA
Previous Story DAWN - the Internet Edition Next Story

July 20, 2003 Sunday Jumadi-ul-Awwal 19, 1424

Click to learn more...
Please Visit our Sponsor (Ads open in separate window)
.




Former SDA chief: judgment reserved



Bureau Report


PESHAWAR, July 19: An accountability court reserved its judgment in a reference against ex-chairman of Sarhad Development Authority, Ahmad Nawaz Shinwari here on Saturday.

The court fixed September 2 for pronouncement of the verdict.

The National Accountability Bureau (NAB) has charged Mr Shinwari of possessing assets disproportionate to his known sources of income, which is a crime under the NAB Ordinance 1999. The accused was arrested on February 24, 2001. He was charged with possessing assets worth Rs15.10 million.

The trial court has examined 93 prosecution and 13 defence witnesses during the trial.

Barrister Zahoorul Haq, appearing for the accused, concluded his arguments on Saturday. He argued that the evidence on record clearly proved that the defendant had not acquired properties in question through illegal means. He said that the income brought on record of the defendant, which did not include his salaries, was to the tune of Rs21.50 million.

Mr Zahoor argued that during the course of proceedings the prosecution had made a request for bringing some more properties of the defendant on record, which were in fact inherited by his wife from her parents. He added that even the income from those properties was not considered by the NAB.

He added that most of the documents on record that proved innocence of the accused were placed by the prosecution.

Mr Zahoor pointed out that the prosecution had placed a statement of a person who had died much before the statement was recorded.

He said that his name was also included in the list of witnesses, but when the prosecution came to know about the illegality they abandoned that witness.






Previous Story Top of Page Next Story

Seprater
Contributions
Privacy Policy
© DAWN Group of Newspapers, 2005