In a recent legal development, an accountability court has temporarily suspended the ongoing warrant for former Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif in the Toshakhana case.
This decision follows a petition to the court, resulting in the suspension of the warrant until October 24. The court clarified that the warrant will be reinstated if Nawaz Sharif fails to make his scheduled court appearance on that date.
The decision was announced by Accountability Judge Mohammad Bashir, who had previously reserved a verdict on the petition. Notably, the National Accountability Bureau (NAB) prosecutor did not object to the petition during the court hearing. The prosecutor emphasized that the court has the authority to suspend the permanent warrant as it was initially issued to secure the accused’s presence in court.
Nawaz Sharif’s legal counsel, Qazi Misbah, argued that his client had been declared a proclaimed offender, leading to the issuance of a permanent warrant for his arrest. However, he assured the court of Nawaz Sharif’s intention to appear before the court on October 21, well ahead of the hearing scheduled for October 24. Consequently, Qazi Misbah requested that the permanent warrant be canceled, emphasizing that his client would indeed attend the hearing.
To support their case, the defense counsel presented a medical treatment report to the court, indicating that Nawaz Sharif had faced health issues when he left Pakistan. The court took note of this information.
Additionally, the court questioned whether the defense had filed a petition for protective bail in the high court, to which Qazi Misbah clarified that no such petition had been submitted. The matter concerning the warrants issued in the Toshakhana reference case had remained unresolved.
It’s important to mention that a similar situation had arisen in the case of Ishaq Dar, where the warrants had been temporarily suspended. In Nawaz Sharif’s case, the accountability court had declared him a proclaimed offender back in September 2020.
The court ultimately reserved its decision on the petition after considering the arguments presented by both parties. Further developments in this case will likely unfold as the legal proceedings progress.