LAHORE: An accountability court on Saturday acquitted former prime minister Nawaz Sharif in a reference about alleged illegal allotment of plots in 1986 to the owner of a media house.

Judge Rao Abdul Jabbar passed the order on applications filed by Yousaf Abbas, a nephew of Mr Sha­rif, and others challenging the auction of the properties supposedly owned by Nawaz Sharif. They claimed ownership of the assets ordered to be auctioned by the court after the former premier was declared a proclaimed offender for his constant absence in the trial proceedings.

The applicants who obj­e­cted to the auction said the assets had been transfer­red to them being lawful legal heirs of the owners.

Their counsel Qazi Misbahul Hassan argued before the court that the principal accused (the media owner) and two former Lahore Development Authority (LDA) officers had already been acquitted in the reference of 37-year-old ‘illegal’ land allotment. He said the acquittal of the principal accused proved that no offence was committed.

Therefore, he argued that keeping the proceedings pending against any other accused including a proclaimed offender after the acquittal of the prime accused would be of no use.

The judge admitted the arguments of the counsel and acquitted Nawaz Sharif in the reference.

The trial court had acquitted a media house owner, former director general of LDA Humayon Faiz Rasool and its former director of land development department Mian Bashir Ahmad on Jan 31, 2022.

The NAB had alleged that the media owner illegally obtained exemption of 54 plots, each measuring one kanal, situated in Johar Town’s Block-H. It said the land had been allotted in connivance with then chief minister Nawaz Sharif against the exemption policy and the laws for monetary gains. It alleged the accused caused a loss of Rs143.53 million to the national exchequer through the allotment in violation of exemption policy.

Acquitting the principal accused, the court in its decision observed that the media owner got plots in 1986 and the LDA, as per the prosecution, pronounced a policy of requiring payment of excess plots at the market price in 1990. The court ruled that the policy had no retrospective effect and was applicable for future cases.

The court concluded that no loss was caused to the LDA from any act of the accused or his co-accused persons as the prosecution admitted that the reserved price was paid in time.