PESHAWAR: Peshawar High Court has remanded back petitions against the freezing of two expensive properties by an accountability court and set aside its order in a high-profile case involving the “embezzlement” of Rs36 billion funds in the Upper Kohistan district accounts office.
While discussing different aspects of the matter, a bench consisting of Justice Sahibzada Asadullah and Justice Inamullah Khan ruled that in view of settled principles of fair trial and due process, the impugned order of the accountability court of Oct 31, 2025, was not sustainable in the eyes of the law.
“The same is set aside, and the matter is remanded to the learned Accountability Court with directions to afford an opportunity of hearing to the appellants, record necessary evidence, including statements of relevant witnesses, and thereafter decide the objections afresh strictly in accordance with law within a period of one month from the receipt of a copy of this order,” it declared.
The bench accepted separate appeals filed by two close relatives of a senior auditor of the accountant general office, Radiullah, who is one of the accused in the case.
The appeals were filed by Radiullah’s wife Safia Parveen and his brother-in-law Iftikhar Ahmad, whose two properties were frozen by the National Accountability Bureau last year and the accountability court had also approved the freezing orders.
The bureau claimed that two properties, including a bungalow and a flat in Peshawar, in fact belonged to the accused, Radiullah.
The appellants had filed objection petitions against the property freezing orders, which were rejected by the accountability court on Oct 31, 2025.
The bench also directed the accountability court to ensure that no undue harassment was caused to the appellants, while the respondents, including NAB, should act strictly within the bounds of law.
About the appellants request for getting possession of the said properties, the bench ordered that they were at liberty to file an appropriate application before the trial court, seeking such relief as may be permissible under the law.
“It is further directed that the rights of the parties, if any, shall remain protected till decision of such application, and the respondents shall refrain from taking any coercive measures with regard to possession except in accordance with due process of law,” the bench ordered.
Advocates Fazal Karim and Mohammad Arshadul Hassan appeared for the appellants and contended that it was an admitted position on record that the house in question was an ancestral property, initially allotted to six legal heirs of the father of the appellant Ms Safia.
They said that subsequently on Jan 25, 2023, all the legal heirs, for valuable consideration, transferred ownership of the house in favour of Iftikhar Ahmad. They added that later on in March 2025, the property was transferred to appellant Ms Safia through an exchange with an apartment owned by her husband Radiullah.
The NAB alleged that since the matter pertained to 2021-22, the said apartment was allegedly acquired through illegal means and in order to conceal the proceeds of crime, the parties executed the exchange deal.
Published in media, April 12th, 2026
American Dollar Exchange Rate