ISLAMABAD - The Islamabad High Court Tuesday granted a 24-hour stay orders against the accountability court’s verdict to confiscate property of Ishaq Dar’s guarantor Ahmed Ali Qudussi.

A division bench of IHC comprising Justice Athar Minallah and Justice Miangul Hassan Aurangzeb conducted hearing of the petition moved by Qudussi who challenged Accountability Court’s order dated December 14 to confiscate his movable properties worth rupees five million. Besides issuing the stay order, the court issued notices to the National Accountability Bureau and adjourned the hearing till today (Wednesday).

In his petition, the petitioner stated that he stood surety for Ishaq Dar in a NAB reference pending before the AC and tendered a bond of five million rupees. He added that Dar was regularly appearing before the court and statements of five witnesses were also recorded.

Later, he pointed that Ishaq Dar was to lead a government delegation in Dushanbe and from there proceeded to Saudi Arabia for Umrah where he felt heaviness in his chest and then he has to travel to London for undergoing certain medical tests.

He continued that on December 11, although the accountability judge under the provision of Article 129 of the Qanun-e-Shahdat Order, 1984 presumed that the doctors have issued the medical report, yet refused to acknowledge the fact that Ishaq Dar is under treatment in London and cannot come back unless the doctors clear him of the condition under review and directed the petitioner to submit the full amount of bond which is five million rupees as fine and that too within a period of three days.

He added that the accountability court also acknowledged that in case the fine is not deposited within three days, warrant for attachment and sale of moveable property of the petitioner shall be issued.

“Although the order to the extent of declaring Ishaq Dar as proclaimed offender was announced in the open court, the certified true copy of the said order was made available to the petitioner only in the later part of December 13 which seriously jeopardised the steps to be taken by the petitioner,” her maintained.

He said that on December 14, the accountability court directed the investigation officer of the case to provide list of moveable property belonging to the petitioner so that it could be attached and sold for the recovery of the above said penalty i.e five million rupees.

He argued that it was on the record that the absence of Dar was not deliberate but under the advice of his doctors whose report had been presumed to be correct and admitted by the court in its order dated December 11. Keeping in view of the matter, it can in no way be said that the absence of the accused is deliberate, he added.

Therefore, the petitioner prayed to the court to set aside AC’s order dated December 14 to confiscate his moveable property.