ISLAMABAD - Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) chief Imran Khan on Thursday again failed to prove before the apex court that he had returned the money he borrowed from his ex-wife Jemima Khan for the purchase of Bani Gala property.

A three-member bench headed by Chief Justice Mian Saqib Nisar resumed hearing on PML-N leader Hanif Abbasi’s petition seeking disqualification of Khan and PTI Secretary General Jahangir Khan Tareen over non-disclosure of assets and owning offshore companies and getting foreign funds to run party affairs.

On September 26, Imran’s counsel Naeem Bukhari sought one-day time to furnish the bank statement to prove that 562,415 pounds were transferred to Jemima’s Anglo Irish Bank account.

But on Thursday he furnished two letters, which were dubbed by the petitioner’s counsel as fake and rejected by the court as proof of repayment of money.

According to the letters, Khan had written to Barclays Private Bank Limited on April 11 and April 18 in 2003 for transfer of 38,124 pounds in Tahir Nawaz’s bank account and 562,415 pounds in the account of Jemima.

The chief justice said that they were not asking why 38,124 pounds were given to Tahir Nawaz but demanding to show the court the authentic proof of returning money to Jemima.

The judge said that the case was very simple, and he told the counsel that “he should have produced this document on the first date of hearing”, adding the matter is pending for many months.

Bukhari informed the bench that the London apartment was sold for 690,307 pounds and out of that amount, 38,124 pounds was paid to Tahir Nawaz, 562,415 pounds to Jemima and 25,000 pounds to solicitors, while the remaining 75,000 pounds were used for litigation to claim damages and recovery of the rent from the tenant of the flat.

The chief justice said that the letters say the money was transferred through banking channel. He inquired where the proof of debit and credit entries was.

Justice Umar Atta Bandial stated: “These are not tax or account proceedings, but we are looking for truth and genuineness. You [Imran] are a public office-holder. Please show us something other than the letters proving that 562,415 pounds went into the account of [your] ex-wife.”

Akram Sheikh, appearing on behalf of Abbasi, pointed out that Imran Khan’s signature on the two letters was completely different. He alleged that “these are forged and fake documents”.

Bukhari argued that Jemima and Tahir Nawaz have also confirmed they have received the money. He placed an email received from Jemima, but the court after examining it returned it to the lawyer. The chief justice observed that Jemima’s email was not addressed to Imran.

The chief justice said throughout the proceedings of the case it had been the stance of Imran that he paid Rs6.5 million, initial payment, for the purchase of Bani Gala, while took the remaining amount from Jemima. But now he has taken the stance that the amount was gifted to him by Jemima. The chief justice noted that all the mutations of Bani Gala land were in the name of Jemima.

Bukhari said that the Bani Gala land was always meant for Jemima, adding it was purchased to encourage her to come back and settle in Pakistan. He said under the law, it was Jemima’s property and if she had not returned to the Imran then what his client could do.

Justice Saqib said if Imran had purchased the land as a gift for Jemima, he should have written so in his replies. Jemima had remitted a substantial amount for the Bani Gala property, he added.

The chief justice said the allegation of the petitioner was that it was ‘gift back arrangement to evade tax’. Bukhari denied it. However, the chief justice remarked that the loan money was different from the gift money.

Abbasi’s counsel argued that Imran has constructed a palatial house in Bani Gala on an area of more than 300 kanals. Akram Sheikh said though Imran claims to champion a simple living, the estimated cost of construction of the house in Bani Gala at that time was said to be around Rs70 million.

The petitioner’s counsel said that the PTI chief failed to declare the source of income, sufficient to construct such a house with that amount. He contended that Imran had declared his total income from the year 1981 to 2008 at Rs21 million and out of that, he has already declared a foreign remittance of Rs11 million.

Imran, he said, has also failed to provide the source of income and detail of the funds for the maintenance of a lavish and luxurious farmhouse in his tax return.

“The house has a contingent of armed guards, chowkidars, gardeners, cooks, servants and transport,” the petitioner’s counsel said. He questioned how the salaries of such a huge staff could be paid by Imran from his declared income. He said that it means he concealed his income or finances.

Imran also failed to pay agriculture income tax on his agriculture land until the year 2012. Moreover, declaring static agriculture income, during few years, reveals that he has declared fake income on account of agriculture to justify investments made with black money, the counsel contended.

The court had directed Bukhari to supply the documents related to litigation for recovery of the money from the tenant and the bank transactions of Jemima’s account.



Imran fails to prove he returned money to ex-wife