SBP counsel
ISLAMABAD, March 31: The Supreme Court on Thursday expressed displeasure at the continuing absence of the State Bank of Pakistan (SBP) counsel in the Indus Bank case and refixed the tentative date of April 18 with an observation that no further adjournment would be granted in future. Led by Chief Justice Nazim Hussain Siddiqui, the bench was hearing an appeal of the SBP against the Indus Bank.
Advocate Anwar Mansoor Khan, counsel for IBL Chairman Khurshid Sohail, told the court that this was the 20th adjournment being sought by the SBP counsel - an exercise which was bringing bad name to the banking sector and damaging the investment climate since foreign investment was involved in the matter.
The SBP had moved the Supreme Court against the decision of the Sindh High Court which had restored the banking licence of the IBL by declaring SBP?s action illegal. The licence had been cancelled by the SBP in September 2000.
Khurshid Sohail was arrested in 2000 by the National Accountability Bureau (NAB) on the SBP complaint that he had allegedly siphoned off bank?s deposits of over Rs150 million by illegally obtaining loan from the IBL?s deposits in the name of different firms and companies for personal benefits in disregard of the banking laws and SBP regulations.
In response, Khurshid Sohail submitted before the Supreme Court an auditor?s report suggesting that the bank had more than sufficient liquidity to pay off all its depositors and creditors.
Earlier in a two-page application, he had also requested the apex court to direct the SBP to ensure presence of its counsel on the day of next hearing. Over 50,000 depositors, shareholders and employees of the Indus Bank are suffering due to inordinate delay being caused in the disposal of the case, the application said.
It stated that the SBP governor had cancelled the licence without approval of the central directorate of the SBP. Besides, the liquidators had not recovered a single rupee from the loan defaulters of the bank, rather spent millions of rupees on travelling, entertainment and other expenses before they were stopped by the apex court on March 24, 2004, from incurring further expenditure.
Since December 12, 2002, neither the SBP nor NAB has ever produced a single document before the Rawalpindi Accountability Court to prove the allegations against the IBL chairman, the application added.
Moreover, it said, the Rawalpindi bench of the Lahore High Court had already stayed the proceedings pending before the accountability court.
Advocate Anwar Mansoor Khan, counsel for IBL Chairman Khurshid Sohail, told the court that this was the 20th adjournment being sought by the SBP counsel - an exercise which was bringing bad name to the banking sector and damaging the investment climate since foreign investment was involved in the matter.
The SBP had moved the Supreme Court against the decision of the Sindh High Court which had restored the banking licence of the IBL by declaring SBP?s action illegal. The licence had been cancelled by the SBP in September 2000.
Khurshid Sohail was arrested in 2000 by the National Accountability Bureau (NAB) on the SBP complaint that he had allegedly siphoned off bank?s deposits of over Rs150 million by illegally obtaining loan from the IBL?s deposits in the name of different firms and companies for personal benefits in disregard of the banking laws and SBP regulations.
In response, Khurshid Sohail submitted before the Supreme Court an auditor?s report suggesting that the bank had more than sufficient liquidity to pay off all its depositors and creditors.
Earlier in a two-page application, he had also requested the apex court to direct the SBP to ensure presence of its counsel on the day of next hearing. Over 50,000 depositors, shareholders and employees of the Indus Bank are suffering due to inordinate delay being caused in the disposal of the case, the application said.
It stated that the SBP governor had cancelled the licence without approval of the central directorate of the SBP. Besides, the liquidators had not recovered a single rupee from the loan defaulters of the bank, rather spent millions of rupees on travelling, entertainment and other expenses before they were stopped by the apex court on March 24, 2004, from incurring further expenditure.
Since December 12, 2002, neither the SBP nor NAB has ever produced a single document before the Rawalpindi Accountability Court to prove the allegations against the IBL chairman, the application added.
Moreover, it said, the Rawalpindi bench of the Lahore High Court had already stayed the proceedings pending before the accountability court.
Read Comments