ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court (SC) on Thursday acquitted three accused held in attack on former president General (R) Pervez Musharraf. The case was heard by Justice Asif Saeed Khosa and Justice Dost Muhammad. Justice Asif Saeed Khosa remarked that the three accused were acquitted due to negligence of the prosecution. The accused including Intekhab Abbasi, Zafar Ali and Muhammad Kabeer were earlier sentenced to death by the high court had converted their punishment to life imprisonment. The three were also accused of having contacts with Tehrik-i-Taliban Pakistan (TTP). Meanwhile, the apex court was requested Thursday to ensure equality before law and appoint a monitoring judge for supervising the pending corruption cases against former military dictator Pervez Musharraf as it has appointed its judge to monitor the proceedings of an anti-corruption court hearing corruption references against former prime minister Nawaz Sharif. In a letter addressed to Chief Justice of Pakistan Justice Mian Saqib Nisar, advocate Colonel (R) Inamul Rahiem requested the apex court to issue directions to Islamabad High Court (IHC) to fix and hear his Petition No. 50/2014) filed against the corruption of former president Pervez Musharraf being pending since 2014. He submitted that the elected prime minister Nawaz Sharif was disqualified and de-seated for not reflecting the receivable amount in his tax returns which he did not receive from his son, while Pervez Musharraf who twice abrogated the Constitution, illegally detained more than 90 judges of the superior judiciary; brought terrorism in Pakistan, directing drone attacks on tribal people and destroyed their houses by launching military operations on the peace loving people of the Fata and Wana, is sitting abroad scotfree. He submitted that instead of protecting and defending the people of Pakistan as Chief of Army Staff, the ex-military dictator, Pervez Musharraf, got them abducted through state secret agencies and thereafter sold them to foreign powers and earned bounties of millions of dollars as he claimed, whereas, the same amount had not been reflected in any of his declaration made before the Election Commission. He further submitted that as per the FBR report, the ex-military dictator neither did pay any income tax nor did submit any tax returns during his illegal and unconstitutional tenure of his office which itself was a serious offence. “At the moment, the elected civilian leader (Nawaz Sharif) is appearing before the courts of motherland and facing trials along with his family, whereas military leader after presenting a fake and false medical certificate, deserted the country and is hiding himself in Dubai”, Inamul Rahiem contended. He contended that the Constitution of Pakistan stresses equality before the law, adding that the elected prime minister is facing reference before the Anti-Corruption Court and one judge of the Supreme Court has been appointed as a supervisory judge to monitor the proceedings, while on the other hand, the case of ex-military dictator, who twice abrogated the Constitution and sold his own people has not yet been commenced. “Hence the law of equality demands that the case of Pervez Musharraf (WP No 50/2014) be fixed and heard on an early date in the interest of justice”. Inamul Rahiem submitted. He recalled that the matter was heard by division bench of Islamabad High Court, headed by Justice Athar Minallah on 26/10/2017 as the request was accepted and the office was directed to fix the main petition on some early date and accordingly, the Registrar Office fixed November 30, 2017 as date of hearing but again invisible forces of state frustrated the entire process of justice and case could not be fixed on the due date as intimated earlier. The applicant recalled that some 67 lawyers lost their lives in the movement of restoration of judiciary out of them 7 advocates were burnt alive in Karachi, more than 30,000 members of law enforcing agencies lost their lives and almost 70,000 common citizens became causality however, he said the culprit is at large, the establishment is openly mapping and shaping the alliance after an alliance consisting of anti-state and anti-social elements, to put life in that dead horse and very unfortunately NAB chairman and honorable judiciary is not moving an inch to take him to task. He requested the chief justice that another judge of apex court may please be appointed as supervisory judge to monitor the cases of Pervez Musharraf as per dictates of law and direction may also be issued to Islamabad High Court to fix and hear the case (Petition No 50/2014) on priority without further delay, in the interest of justice. As per the case facts, the applicant had sent a complaint/reference to NAB chairman for initiating criminal proceedings against former military dictator, Pervez Musharraf on 02-04-2013. On 10-04, 2013 then he forwarded another reference/complaint and in both the references/complaints, former NAB chairmen, Admiral (R) Fasih Bukhari and Maj (R) Qamar Zaman regretted to initiate any action against Pervez Musharraf and directed the applicant to approach GHQ for initiation of action under Army Act. He, however, said that this fact was well within the knowledge of both the gentlemen being former employees of defence forces that Pervez Musharraf was retired from the Army and illegally occupied the office of self-style chief executive, a public office and thereby attracted the provisions of NAO 1999. Thereafter the applicant approached the Islamabad High Court by filing a writ petition on 08-01-2014, which came up for hearing on 15-01-2014 wherein the court asked for para-wise comments. The NAB and General (R) Pervez Musharraf filed their respective comments on 07-05-2014 however the case could not come up for hearing thereafter. He informed the chief justice that on 17-01-2017, the petition was fixed without intimation/notice to the applicant and dismissed due to non-prosecution. On information, he filed an application for restoration of writ petition, which was accepted and the writ petition was restored on 16-02-2017 but the said case could not come up for hearing.
