Rs231m graft case filed against SBCA director belonging to MQM and wife

Published August 26, 2020
NAB alleged that while remaining government servant suspect Adil Umer Siddiqui, a director (BPS-19) in the Sindh Building Control Authority, earned millions of rupees, which were beyond his known source of income.
NAB alleged that while remaining government servant suspect Adil Umer Siddiqui, a director (BPS-19) in the Sindh Building Control Authority, earned millions of rupees, which were beyond his known source of income.

KARACHI: An accountability court has admitted a reference against an official of the Sindh Building Control Authority, Adil Umer Siddiqui, and his wife in a case pertaining to alleged accumulation of around Rs231 million assets “beyond known sources of income”.

Former provincial minister and leader of the Muttahida Qaumi Movement Adil Umer Siddiqui along with his wife Syeda Nusrat Adil has been named in the reference by the National Accountability Bureau.

Administrative judge of the accountability courts Abdul Ghani Soomro recently admitted the reference for hearing and transferred the same to the accountability court-III for initiating further proceedings.

However, both Mr and Mrs Siddiqui have been shown on bail in the reference.

Therefore, the trial court issued a notice to them to appear before it on the next date.

Investigating officer Ghulam Abbas filed the reference through the special public prosecutor for NAB Syed Dilshad Hussain Shah under Section 18(g) read with Section 24(b) of the National Accountability Ordinance, 1999.

The IO filed the reference along with the investigation report, list of the witnesses’ statements recorded under Section 161 of the criminal procedure code (CrPC) and a list of the relevant documentary evidence.

In the reference, the federal anti-graft watchdog mentioned that an inquiry against Mr Siddiqui was upgraded to investigation on May 22, 2019.

It mentioned that while remaining government servant suspect Adil Umer Siddiqui, a director (BPS-19) in the Sindh Building Control Authority, earned millions of rupees, which were beyond his known source of income.

It further alleged that the suspect maintained benami bank accounts in addition to various benami transactions.

It added that Mr Siddiqui’s total liability, as per cash flow chart, is Rs70,551,047 and total Rs68,865,113 was unjustified amount in his and his family members’ accounts. Furthermore, the watchdog mentioned, Rs100,494,449 are unjustified in benami accounts/transactions. Therefore, the total liability is estimated at Rs239,910,609, it added.

In the reference, NAB mentioned that Mrs Siddiqui claimed earning an income of Rs66,000,000 for the M/s Nusrat Boutique and M/s M.F Embroidery during the period from year 1997 to 2008.

She stated that properties purchased in her name in 2013 and bank accounts are maintained by her through her business income. She did not explain transactions in her bank accounts, it added.

The reference mentioned that Mr Adil Umer failed to provide business income claim of M/s Farooq and Company, adding he also failed to provide record explaining his salary income for Habib Fida Ali.

He also failed to justify gifts he claimed to have received from his father and Saima Builders over various years, it added.

He also failed to provide documents explaining amounts of sale/purchase of the assets in the Defence Housing Authority.

Furthermore, he mentioned seven benami accounts with millions of rupees’ transactions in the name of a naib qasid of the SBCA and his family members in disproportion to his known source of income.

The reference mentioned that Ms Syeda Nusrat abetted her husband in falsely maintaining Rs66,000,000 as business income claims and could not justify it. Furthermore, the property worth Rs94,000,000 was purchased in her name, major account of which was routed through benami accounts/transactions.

Regarding the role of Mr Adil Umer Siddiqui, the reference mentioned that he being government servant accumulated assets disproportionate to his known source of income, adding that he purchased properties worth millions of rupees and maintained seven benami accounts with credits in millions of rupees that he failed to justify.

It further alleged that Mr Siddiqui possessed assets in foreign countries, adding that an investigation also revealed that he also received illegal gratification during his service.

It mentioned that Mr Siddiqui earned Rs271,885 as business income of M/s Farooq and Company during 1987 to 1997, claimed winning Rs26,891,492 as winning prize bond during 1983 to 2018.

The watchdog also mentioned that his sons; Zuhair Ahmed Siddiqui received Rs33,175,500 during 2014 to 2017 and Mahad Ahmed Siddiqui Rs530,400 in 2016 and Ms Syeda Nusrat received Rs33,365,900 as proceed of winning prize bond in 1993-2017.

Published in Dawn, August 26th, 2020

Opinion

Enter the deputy PM

Enter the deputy PM

Clearly, something has changed since for this step to have been taken and there are shifts in the balance of power within.

Editorial

All this talk
Updated 30 Apr, 2024

All this talk

The other parties are equally legitimate stakeholders in the country’s political future, and it must give them due consideration.
Monetary policy
30 Apr, 2024

Monetary policy

ALIGNING its decision with the trend in developed economies, the State Bank has acted wisely by holding its key...
Meaningless appointment
30 Apr, 2024

Meaningless appointment

THE PML-N’s policy of ‘family first’ has once again triggered criticism. The party’s latest move in this...
Weathering the storm
Updated 29 Apr, 2024

Weathering the storm

Let 2024 be the year when we all proactively ensure that our communities are safeguarded and that the future is secure against the inevitable next storm.
Afghan repatriation
29 Apr, 2024

Afghan repatriation

COMPARED to the roughshod manner in which the caretaker set-up dealt with the issue, the elected government seems a...
Trying harder
29 Apr, 2024

Trying harder

IT is a relief that Pakistan managed to salvage some pride. Pakistan had taken the lead, then fell behind before...