ISLAMABAD: A five judge bench of the apex court, headed by Justice Nasirul Mulk, is scheduled to hear on June 23 the government’s plea challenging the Sindh High Court's ruling which ordered the removal of Pervez Musharraf's name from the exit control list (ECL).

Earlier today, the apex court disposed of a government request calling for an early hearing of the plea filed against the SHC’s decision.

A three-judge bench of the apex court, headed by Chief Justice Tasadduq Hussain Jillani, heard the request calling for an early disposal of the challenge against the lifting of travel restrictions on Musharraf.

Read more: Pervez Musharraf | Analysis: The final flight?

The bench fixed the hearing of the challenge for June 23 and disposed of the second plea for an early hearing saying no further discussion was needed on the subject.

Last week, the SHC had struck down the travel restrictions on Musharraf and had said that the ex-army strongman will have to wait for two weeks to find out if he could actually travel abroad.

The high court had suspended the operation of its judgment for 15 days enabling the federation to file an appeal in the Supreme Court.

Special court records interior secretary’s testimony

The special court constituted to try Musharraf for treason recorded the testimony of Interior Secretary Shahid Khan on Wednesday.

The three-judge special court, headed by Justice Faisal Arab of the Sindh High Court, has been hearing the treason case against the former army strongman.

Khan told the court that he had been instructed by the federal government on June 26, 2013 to register the case against the former president.

He added that the case was registered following investigations carried out by the Federal Investigation Agency (FIA).

The interior secretary said that five charges were levelled in the case in light of the FIA’s investigation.

More on this: Prosecution accused of delaying treason trial

The special court had directed Khan to produce the original letter from the Prime Minister House in this regard which the interior secretary failed to do, saying the letter may be in possession of the Supreme Court.

Subsequently, the court adjourned the hearing to June 24.