ISLAMABAD: Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N) leader Hanif Abbasi on Wednesday submitted his reply before the Supreme Court in response to the supplementary concise statement filed by Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) chairman on Tuesday, pertaining to purchase of Bani Gala land. Abbasi termed the statement as contrary to his previous statements and pleadings about the acquisition of Bani Gala land and prayed the court to dismiss it for being unreliable. Abbasi had filed petitions in the Supreme Court, seeking disqualification of the PTI chief Imran Khan and Secretary General Jehangir Tareen for non-disclosure of their assets, ownership of offshore companies, and for PTI being a foreign-aided party. Naeem Bukhari, counsel for PTI chief Imran Khan the other day (Tuesday) had filed supplementary concise statement in pursuance of the apex court directions and had submitted that the Bani Gala land was in fact and law, the property of his Imran Khan’s ex-wife Jemima Goldsmith and was declared as such and the payment to Jemima by Imran Khan was a matter between husband and wife, not declarable to any authority whatsoever. Khan had contended that the payment to Jemima by him was a matter between husband and wife, not declarable to any authority because prior to June 30, 2003, and during July 1, 2002 till June 30, 2003 the issue had been settled between a husband and wife, leaving nothing to declare to any authority, including the Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP). However, Abbasi in his reply filed in the court through his counsel Akram Sheikh submitted that in his initial concise statement titled CMA 7925/2016, Khan claimed that he purchased the Bani Gala land for himself, and Jemima remitted funds for the land as a loan. He submitted that the agreement to sell the land was also in the name of Imran, whereas he has made no reference that any land was being purchased for the benefit of Jemima. Abbasi states that the entire tenor is that Imran was purchasing the land for himself, but in the name of Jemima, adding that later on, in his affidavit filed in CMA 3657/17, Imran Khan claimed that he purchased the property for Jemima and their children. He further stated that the entire land was mutated in the name of Jemima, and it was her property for all intents and purposes, however, to make payment for the land, Imran acquired “bridge financing” from Jemima, which was later returned to her. He contended that in the instant application, Imran Khan has backtracked his steps, and claims that the Bani Gala property was purchased by Ms Jemima herself, the entire sale price was paid by her and the property was ‘in fact and law the property of Jemima, his then spouse. Hence, Mr Khan completely suppresses the fact of obtaining loan from Jemima, to purchase the said land, Abbasi contended. He said the contribution paid by Rashid Ali Khan from his own funds was settled between him and her. Abbasi said Khan’s stance is a complete deviation from his earlier pleadings. He said the position adopted in the present concise statement that the land was always the exclusive property of Jemima and she paid for it, has again been contradicted in the concise statement of PTI chief. He said the assertion of Imran Khan that the use of the term “benami” in the Power of Attorney by Jemima is an error, is completely contrary to the record and is an afterthought. In this regard, Abbasi said the wording of the power of attorney is self-explanatory, wherein two separate assertions have been made by Ms Jemima with regard to the land i.e. firstly, “That the land was purchased by Imran Khan Niazi” and secondly, “The land was transferred in my name through mutation by my ex-husband Imran Ahmed Khan Niazi ‘as a benami transaction’ after the separation/divorces between me and Imran Khan. Abbasi contended that the record clearly shows that the property was purchased in the name of Ms Jemima, as her name appears on all mutations, however the payment of funds which were sent by Jemima, was admittedly a loan to Khan, therefore, was his property. Hence, as the land was purchased in the name of Ms Jemima, and the funds were truly provided by Imran Khan, a strong presumption arises that Ms Jemima was in fact a benamidaar, as she has asserted in her power of attorney, Abbasi maintained. The Supreme Court will resume hearing of this case today (Thursday). Published in Daily Times, September 28th 2017.