Court summons Musharraf on 31st to record statement

High treason case

ISLAMABAD: The Special Court in the high treason case against General (retd) Pervez Musharraf on Tuesday summoned the former military dictator in-person on March 31 to record his statement as the court expressed annoyance for not submitting medical report following the due process

A three-member bench of the Special Court headed by Justice Mazhar Alam Miankhel and comprising Justice Tahira Safdar and Justice Yawar Ali resumed hearing on the Federation’s complaint, seeking a high treason case against former President Gen (retd) Pervez Musharraf for imposing emergency rule on November 3, 2007.

Muhammad Akram Sheikh, the prosecution lawyer, submitted before the court that all  other stages in the instant trial had been completed and after the Supreme Court order, now the accused should be summoned at the earliest to record his statement.

The prosecution lawyer contended that the Special Court was empowered to summon the accused, Pervez Musharraf and record his statement under Section 342 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC).

Section 342 of the CrPC says: Any court dealing with an application made to it for filing a complaint under section 340 or an appeal under section 341 shall have the power to make such order as to costs as may be just.

The prosecution stressed that the trial proceeding should be held on daily basis. Faisal Chaudhry, one of the lawyers of Pervez Musharraf submitted before the court that the lead lawyer Barrister Farogh Nasim could not appear before the court as being a Vice Chairman of the Pakistan Bar Council (PBC) he had given a call for lawyer’s strike in the wake of terrorist attack made the other day on the District Courts in Charsadda.

Justice Mazhar Alam Miankhel however observed that all the courts in the country are functioning and they are not on strike. Faisal Chaudhry however, said that Mr Farogh Nasim was also engaged in a hearing at Supreme Court Karachi Registry regarding law and order case of Karachi hence he could not appear before the Special Court.

Justice Mazhar Alam Mian Khel however observed that to proceed further with the instant case, recording the statement of the accused is necessary. Faisal Chaudhry contended before the court that Pervez Musharraf is unwell and admitted in the hospital. He also produced before the court, medial report of the former President.

Justice Mazhar Alam Miankhel however, admonished the counsel’s saying he should have properly made the medical report part of the record adding that it was not the right way to produce the medical report before the court. Faisal Chaudhry however, said that as the bench was incomplete hence they could not submit the medical report well on time.

Muhammad Akram Sheikh, prosecution lawyer however objected to the defence lawyer’s justification saying although the bench was incomplete yet the Special Court did exist and the medical report should have been submitted before the court.

He further contended that incomplete bench did not mean that there was no Special Court. Meanwhile, the court summoned Pervez Musharraf in-person on 31st of March to record his statement under Section 342 of CrPC. The court directed to make a questionnaire before recording of the statement of the accused and adjourned the hearing.