IHC reserves judgment on Nawaz Sharif's plea seeking together arguments in all references

ISLAMABAD: The Islamabad High Court (IHC) Thursday reserved its judgment on petition of former prime minister Muhammad Nawaz Sharif seeking together closing arguments in all three references against Sharif family members.

A divisional bench of IHC comprising Justice Aamer Farooq and Justice Mohsin Akhtar Kayani heard the petition of Nawaz Sharif challenging the June 5, order of the accountability court stating that all three references couldn’t be clubbed due to technicalities.

During the course of proceeding, the petitioner's counsel Amjad Pervai contended that the accountability court had earlier decided to announce the judgment together in three references but now the court first wanted to complete the proceeding over Avenfield property reference.

However, NAB prosecutor Sardar Muzafar Abbasi adopted the stance that the defense counsel had started his closing arguments in the same reference from June 19 and after this the petition has become un-effective.

He said firstly the accused's stance was that 'their defense would be disclosed if the court conducted separate proceedings on references but later they didn't produce any evidence in their defense in statements under section 341 CrPC.' Abbasi said that the accountability court had written in its decision dated November 8, 2017 that the judgment in three references would be announced together in case of producing evidences by the defense side.

Now the court had also mentioned in order-sheet that 'the current situation was different after the accused didn't present anything in their defense,' he argued.

He said the petitioner didn't requested the court to announce judgments together in all references in his plea. NAB prosecutor further said that two accused amongst three didn't request court for together closing arguments in all references. Amjad Perviaz argued that his clients have requested the court to postpone answers over five questions amongst a total of 128 but the accountability court had rejected the same.

It was the first case in which the court proceeding was used to continue till 10:00pm in a day, he said. After conclusion of arguments from both sides at large, the divisional bench reserved its judgment in the case.