Ex-MP Alhan, brothers plead not guilty to tax charge
The charges stem from their alleged involvement in a financial scheme under the banner of Kings Capital Holdings Pvt Ltd, in which the family has a stake.
Top Stories
-
MP seeks parliamentary probe over HDC's forged land allocation
-
Govt assures landowner rights amid HDC forged land allocation
-
HDC chief, board members suspended over land allocation
-
HDC chief-linked plot error noticed in June; failed to report
-
Police probe alleged Fazul-linked forgery of land ownership docs
Former Member of Parliament Alhan Fahmy, along with his brothers Sahuban Fahmy and Shazuban Fahmy, has pleaded not guilty to a series of tax charges filed against them.
The charges stem from their alleged involvement in a financial scheme under the banner of Kings Capital Holdings Pvt Ltd, in which the family has a stake.
The trio faces 13 separate charges of tax-related offences, with accusations centred on allegedly extorting money from individuals through a scheme connected to Kings Capital Holdings.
At a hearing held in the Criminal Court, the charges were read, and the defense mounted their case in response. Both the prosecution and defence agreed that the arguments and legal grounds for the charges were nearly identical across all 13 counts.
The prosecution, led by Hawwa Naahi, argued that the three brothers had orchestrated a scheme that misled investors, resulting in financial losses for the public.
The defence team, represented by attorneys Ali Saeed and Aishath Azima Shakoor, questioned the clarity of the charges, emphasising that it was unclear how the three defendants were individually implicated and to what extent they were responsible.
The defence raised several key points of contention, challenging the prosecution’s case on both legal and factual grounds:
-
1-
The defence sought clarification on whether the company or the three defendants had actively represented the scheme as profitable and if all three were involved in promoting this perception.
-
2-
The defence questioned whether the three brothers could be held individually accountable for the company's transactions, noting that liability might rest with the entity rather than individuals.
-
3-
The lawyers argued that since the charges against the brothers were framed identically, it was unclear how each had contributed to the alleged crime.
The prosecution argued that all three brothers were actively involved in the scheme:
-
Alhan was accused of promoting the scheme on social media and collecting investor funds, which were then deposited into his personal account.
-
Sahuban, a shareholder in Kings Capital, was allegedly involved in the company’s transactions and had received company funds in his account.
-
Shazuban was implicated by virtue of his stake in another Kings-affiliated company, which held a majority share in Kings Capital. Additionally, he was linked to a Telegram account used in the scheme through his phone number.
Despite the detailed allegations, the three brothers maintained their innocence.
Alhan denied knowing or dealing with any of the alleged victims.
Sahuban reiterated that the charges were unclear and questioned the specifics of his alleged role.
Shazuban also rejected the charges, pointing out inconsistencies in how the prosecution referred to the company in question.
The core of the prosecution’s case involves allegations of money laundering and financial misconduct.
The prosecution claims that between 2021 and 2022, over MVR 98 million was invested by the public into Kings Capital, with the company promising significant financial returns.
However, the investors were not paid, and the funds were allegedly misappropriated by the defendants.
The 13 charges are tied to alleged money laundering offences, with the prosecution accusing the defendants of failing to pay investors or fulfil their obligations under the scheme.
This case follows a series of Civil Court rulings in which individuals involved in the Kings Capital scheme were ordered to repay significant sums.
Two individuals recovered over MVR 1 million, while other rulings throughout the year demanded payments totalling more than MVR 700,000 from additional participants in last year May and December.
