Arrest warrants issued for Siraj Durrani’s wife, son, four daughters, others
KARACHI: An accountability court in Karachi issued non-bailable warrants for 13 suspects, including members of Sindh Assembly Speaker Agha Siraj Durrani’s family, on Saturday in a case pertaining to assets beyond means.
Pakistan Peoples Party’s Siraj Durrani and others — including his wife Naheed Durrani, his son Agha Shahbaz Durrani and four daughters — are suspected of illegally accumulating assets worth more than 1.6 billion rupees.
Durrani was arrested by the National Accountability Bureau (NAB) on February 20 the following year from Islamabad. The accountability watchdog is investigating into the suspect’s assets, hundreds of alleged unlawful appointments made by him and alleged embezzlement in national exchequer.
Also Read: NAB arrests Maryam Nawaz from jail premises
On being asked, the investigation officer on Saturday told the court that notices had been served to the absconders. The accountability court on this occasion directed to block their national identity cards and issue their arrest warrants.
Moreover, the IO has been ordered to present a report in the case after taking action against the absconders.
The court is adjourned till Oct 22.
Since, the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) government has come into power, high-profile arrests have taken place which include arrests of former president Asif Zardari, deposed prime minister Nawaz Sharif, former prime minister Shahid Khaqan Abbasi, Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N) Vice President Maryam Nawaz and ex-finance minister Miftah Ismail among others.
On Aug 7, Miftah Ismail was arrested from the premises of the Islamabad High Court (IHC) after the court rejected his plea for an extension in his pre-arrest interim bail in the liquefied natural gas (LNG) import case.
He was wanted by the NAB for inquiry against former petroleum minister Shahid Khaqan Abbasi and the then secretary ministry of petroleum about award of LNG terminal-1 to Engro Energy Terminal Private Limited.
Miftah’s counsel had argued that the accountability watchdog in the same court had said that they did not require to arrest his client then what was the compulsion now to arrest him.