LAHORE, Nov 5: Former Punjab chief minister Shahbaz Sharif has filed an appeal with the Supreme Court seeking a direction that he be allowed to return home to stand trial on charges of abetting a murder.

The appeal against a Lahore High Court decision has been filed by Malik Qayyum on Mr Sharif’s behalf, and it says that the appellant wants to return home but is not being allowed to do so by the authorities.

A writ petition was earlier dismissed by the office of Lahore High Court on grounds that Mr Sharif had been declared a fugitive. It contended that the appellant was not a fugitive and was prepared to stand trial if allowed to return home. Mr Sharif said Pakistan was his home and there should be no bar on his return.

The former Punjab chief minister was charged with abetting a murder in 1998, and an FIR against him was registered by the Sabzazar police on March 29, 2001, which also charged him with the offence of terrorism. A challan against him and others was sent to an Anti-Terrorism Court (ATC) which, after a long process of summoning him for trial, declared on July 18, 2003 that he was a proclaimed offender, and issued non-bailable warrants for his arrest.

A writ petition against ATC’s proclamation was filed with the Lahore High Court, and the registrar’s office raised the objection that since the petitioner was an absconder and a fugitive from law, the petition was not maintainable until his surrender.

Manzoor Malik, counsel for Mr Sharif, submitted to the court of Justice Raja Mohammad Sabir that the objection was not sustainable under the law as it amounted to a judgment that the office was not competent to pass; only the court could have declared if Mr Sharif was an absconder and fugitive from law.

Mr Malik submitted that Mr Sharif was neither an absconder nor a fugitive from law because there had been no proceedings of any court of the country for ensuring his return and attendance. He also submitted that the trial court (ATC) had not adopted the legally-prescribed procedure prior to issuing the non-bailable warrants for the arrest of Mr Sharif. Citing a number of cases, the counsel submitted that even an absconder had the right to file an appeal. The petition was maintainable and the office objection, which amounted to passing a judicial order, null and void in the eyes of the law.

Justice Raja Mohammad Sabir upheld the office objection in his judgment on Oct 17, and ruled that the petition of Mr Sharif could not be entertained until he surrendered to the trial court, which had duly issued perpetual non-bailable warrants for his arrest as well as that of co-accused Bara Ashraf.

As for the merits of case, the judgment said those could not be examined till the writ petition was entertained. On the contention that registrar’s office had no authority to raise an objection that amounted to a judicial order, the judgment said the Sherin case in which the Supreme Court had reversed the office objection the issue pertained to a civil suit and not to a criminal case or that of a fugitive from law. The deputy registrar was empowered under Chapter-1(a) of the High Court Rules and Orders (Volume 5) to scrutinize the memo of a petition or appeal, and if he did not find it complete or properly constituted, he could raise objections and rule that the petition was not maintainable.

As for the counsel’s contention against the ATC proclamation which was a judicial order in a criminal case wherein the petitioner was at large, the judgment said, the benefit was available to the remaining accused and not to the absconder who had been declared a proclaimed offender.