Sharif attorney sees ‘unholy haste’ in court order

Asks IHC to set aside trial court’s Oct 19 order; IHC puts NAB on notice

ISLAMABAD: The Islamabad High Court (IHC) on Wednesday issued notice to the National Accountability Court (NAB) on three petitions of PML-N President Nawaz Sharif, inter alia, requesting the court to set aside an order of an accountability court through which it framed charges separately in three references.

A division bench comprising Justice Aamer Farooq and Justice Mohsin Akhtar Kayani put the top anti-graft body on notice and directed it to submit a reply by November 2 while hearing the petitions of the deposed prime minister.



While challenging the trial court’s order of October 19, Sharif through his counsel has sought the IHC’s directions for the accountability court to frame joint charge and conduct a single trial against the Sharif family.

Also, the three-time former prime minister has also prayed the court to suspend proceedings before the accountability court till the framing of joint charge. He has made the state through the NAB chairman and judge of the accountability court respondents in the petition.

When the case was taken up, the counsel for the former prime minister informed the division bench that it was for the first time that more than one reference had been filed in the assets beyond means case though the series of the transactions was the same.

The counsel contended that there should be a ‘joint trial’ instead of three separate references, adding there was no bar on framing joint charge when the allegations were the same against the suspects.

“Trial proceedings should not be a continuation of the Supreme Court’s proceedings,” he said. He added that an impression was being created that all legal obligations were being dispensed with in this trial.

In the petition, the counsel said each of the three references was supplemented by the same nine volumes of the JIT report while several witnesses were common in the references.

“Keeping in view the provision of Section 9(a)(v) of the NAO-1999 and all precedents pertaining thereto,” he said, “all offences falling under the provision of law constitute a single offence irrespective of the nature and number of assets alleged to be owned, possessed or acquired by petitioner.”

“Only one reference could be brought against the petitioner on the basis of the allegations made in each of the aforementioned references,” he said, adding, “He can only be tried once on the basis of the said allegations.”

The impugned order is based on gross misreading and non-reading of the ‘facts’ on which it is purportedly based and the factors relevant for the purpose of considering whether a joint trial is necessary or not have not been taken into account, the counsel maintains.

“Court has not at all considered the adverse impact of separate trials upon the defence of the petitioner,” he stated.

The petition reads the impugned order has been passed in unholy haste and without adverting to the law applicable to the issue raised before the accountability court.

On October 19, Sharif, his daughter Maryam and son-in-law Captain (retd) Safdar were indicted in a NAB reference pertaining to Avenfield Apartments in London.

During the hearing, all three accused had pleaded not guilty and decided to stand trial. Maryam Nawaz and her husband Captain (retd) Safdar had appeared in person while Sharif was represented by pleader Zaafir Khan.



Accountability Court Judge Muhammad Bashir also indicted Sharif in the references concerning Al-Azizia Company Limited and Hill Metals Establishment. Through the pleader, Sharif pleaded not guilty to the charges.

Before the indictment, the court had dismissed three applications of the Sharif family which led to the instant litigation.

In the applications, the Sharif family through their counsel had prayed for a stay on the trial until the release of a detailed judgment by the Supreme Court over their review petition.

Secondly, the counsel requested the court not to frame charges as NAB did not provide copies of “all the prosecution witnesses” and, thirdly, appealed the court to combine the three NAB references into one and then proceed to the stage of framing charges.

The court, however, had dismissed all three applications and proceeded with the indictment. After the pleas of the Sharif family were recorded, the court had directed NAB to start producing evidence and witnesses in the references against Sharif, Maryam and Safdar from the next date of hearing.

NAB would now produce two witnesses on October 26 (today).