ISLAMABAD: A deputy attorney general (DAG) informed the Islamabad High Court (IHC) on Tuesday that a senior executive of the information technology firm Axact who had pleaded guilty in a US court to charges of conspiracy to commit wire fraud in connection with an international ‘diploma mill’ case was a prosecution witness of the Federal Investigation Agency.

DAG Raja Mohammad Khalid, while arguing for the maintainability of an appeal the government has filed against the acquittal of Axact officials, including its chief executive officer Shoaib Sheikh, said the federal government could challenge the verdict of the trial court even over three months after the acquittal of the accused.

He said the senior executive of the firm which had allegedly sold hundreds of fake degrees of unrecognised and non-chartered institutions had pleaded guilty before the US court.

Umair Hamid, 30, admitted to the char­ges before District Judge Ronnie Abrams, the US Department of Justice reported on its website.

“Operating from Pakistan, Umair Hamid helped fraudulently rake in millions of dollars from unwitting American consumers who paid to enrol in, and get degrees from high schools and colleges that did not exist,” Acting US Attorney Joon H. Kim was quoted as saying in the department’s press release. Hamid, an executive in Axact, was arrested on Dec 19, 2016, according to a statement by former Manhattan US attorney Preet Bharara. He was produced in a federal court in Fort Mitchell, Kentucky, the following day.

Mr Khalid further told the IHC that Hamid was a prosecution witness and had gone to the US while the case was pending before the trial court.

Additional District and Sessions Judge (ADSJ) Pervaizul Qadir Memon acquitted the Axact officials last year of charges of selling fake degrees, for want of evidence.

Axact counsel Raja Rizwan Abbasi challenged the maintainability of the appeal filed by the government against the acquittal and said that since the FIA had registered the case under various sections of the Anti-Money Laundering Act (AMAL), the federal government could have challenged the acquittal within two months only. He said that since the appeal had been filed after a lapse of three months and 11 days, it was now time-barred and should be dismissed.

Mr Khalid said the government did not file the appeal under the AMAL, but had challenged the acquittal under Sub-section 1 of Section 417 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC).

He said even otherwise, the AMAL set a deadline for filing an appeal within two months for “any person”, whereas the state could not be treated at par with a person, therefore, the law was silent with respect to the right of the federal government for filing an appeal. He said that the superior courts had held that the general law might be applied in situations where a special law was silent on an issue.

Published in Dawn, April 12th, 2017