PTI founder’s close aides acquitted in foreign funding case

Court rules FIA could not prove charges; cases initiated in 2022 will be concluded

Six acquitted of DSP’s murder. / PHOTO: EXPRESS

LAHORE:

A banking court in Lahore acquitted close associates of the PTI founder, ending a foreign funding case initiated by the Federal Investigation Agency (FIA) in 2022.

Bench Court 2 delivered the verdict after hearing the final arguments, acquitting Hamid Zaman, Tariq Shafi and Asad Kakakhel.

The court ruled that the prosecution had not substantiated the allegations made against the defendant.

Defense lawyer Barrister Mian Ali Ashfaq, who represented the accused, argued that the case lacked credible evidence and that the prosecution had been unable to establish any illegal foreign funding. He maintained that the charges were based on assumptions rather than documented evidence.

According to the prosecution, the FIA ​​had registered the case in 2022 alleging that the accused were involved in receiving and managing foreign funds for the Insaf Trust in violation of relevant laws.

The agency had subsequently filed a case with the bankruptcy court.

After examining the record and hearing arguments from both sides, the court ruled in favor of the accused and ordered their acquittal, effectively ending the case.

Meanwhile, a district court in Lahore reserved its verdict on an application filed by Punjab Information Minister Azma Bukhari in a separate case regarding the alleged circulation of a fake video on social media.

The case is pending against social media activist Falak Javed and others, accused of making a fake video viral online.

During the case, Azma Bukhari requested the court to record her statement at the end of the trial, arguing that statements of prosecution witnesses should be recorded first.

However, the defense opposed the plea and maintained that according to the law the complainant’s statement must be recorded first.

Defense counsel Rana Maroof Advocate requested the court to summon Azma Bukhari at the next hearing to record her statement and sought rejection of her application.

After hearing arguments, the court reserved its decision on the petition.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Scroll to Top