Rs8.5bn BRT scam: Abbasi’s bail rejected

A Karachi anti-corruption court has rejected the bail application of former BRT Yellow Line Project Director Zameer Abbasi in a case involving alleged corruption of Rs8.5 billion.

The case relates to alleged financial irregularities in the BRT Yellow Line project, where Abbasi has been accused of violating official procedures and making payments without following required rules.

During the hearing, the prosecution informed the court that the accused allegedly approved payments without the approval of the National Engineering Services Pakistan (NESPAK) and failed to comply with contractual and procurement requirements.

The special public prosecutor said the investigation into the case was still underway. However, he also stated that the prosecution would not oppose bail if the court decided to grant relief to the accused.

The court expressed dissatisfaction with the prosecutor’s stance and questioned whether the Anti-Corruption Department had conducted an independent inquiry before registering the case.

Officials told the court that the case was registered on the basis of a report prepared by the Chief Minister’s Inspection Team (CMIT), while no separate inquiry was conducted by the Anti-Corruption Department.

The court also raised questions about the legal authority of the CMIT report and whether an FIR could be registered solely on the basis of such findings.

In its written order, the court stated that the prosecution failed to provide the required written approval from the competent authority. It rejected the concession given by the prosecutor and said the available evidence required further legal proceedings.

The court observed that the CMIT report, official documents, and other records available on file indicated a connection between the accused and the alleged offences.

According to the judgment, the inquiry report showed that payments made during the project were allegedly against contractual terms, financial regulations, and procurement procedures.

The court noted that the alleged irregular payments caused financial losses to the government and provided illegal benefits to private contractors.

It further stated that corruption cases involving public funds are different from ordinary criminal cases and require a cautious approach while deciding bail applications.