SC seeks record from FIA in money laundering case against Moonis Elahi
Pakistan
The DAG told the court that 11 people, including Moonis Elahi, are accused of money laundering
ISLAMABAD (Dunya News) – The Supreme Court of Pakistan on Friday ordered the FIA to furnish record while hearing an appeal against dismissal of a money laundering case against Moonis Elahi.
The deputy attorney general told the court that 11 people, including Moonis Elahi, were accused of money laundering through fake bank accounts.
Justice Ayesha Malik said the Lahore High Court had issued a detailed judgement in the case. Many institutions, including NAB, had investigated these accounts, she added.
Justice Sardar Tariq Masood inquired how could the same case be investigated again and again? The deputy attorney general replied that NAB was investigating assets beyond means case.
Justice Masood asked when the accounts under review were opened? The deputy attorney general replied that some accounts were opened in 2007, and some from 2010 to 2014.
He said NAB completed the investigation in 2020, and the accountability court reviewed it. How is it possible that NAB has not reviewed this matter?
The deputy attorney general said the money laundering came to light from the report of the Sugar Commission.
Justice Malik intervened and said the sugar commission was responsible for price fixing. The commission did not investigate the case of Rahim Yar Khan Mills which has been made a base of the money laundering case.
She said the FIA could not justify the case.
Justice Masood remarked that the anti-money laundering law was enacted in 2010. According to you, the basis of the case is the 2007 account.
How can a law enacted in 2010 be applied retrospectively, he questioned the deputy attorney general.
He ordered NAB to submit reference details and records and “then it will be decided whether to issue notice to Moonis or not.”
The deputy attorney general said the LHC overstepped its authority and dismissed the case.
Justice Yahya Afridi said a high court had the constitutional authority to dispose of a case at the first hearing.
