Former army chief General (r) Mirza Aslam Beg on Wednesday filed a review petition in the Supreme Court (SC) against its verdict on the Asghar Khan case which challenged the distribution of funds by intelligence agencies among selected politicians to rig the 1990 polls.
In his petition, Beg said that he had not been given a fair chance to defend himself before the bench, requesting the court to hear him again, at length.
“Whatever I did, was at the behest of the supreme commander. And, in case of non-compliance, the disciplinary action might have ensued against him.”
Meanwhile, the SC Registrar’s Office has allowed two weeks to the advocate on record accepting his request for filing paper books in the review plea moved by the federation in the Asghar Khan case.
A press release from the SC on Wednesday said it was clarified that the federation of Pakistan through the Ministry of Law and Parliamentary Affairs secretary filed the review petition seeking review of the Supreme Court’s judgment dated October 19, 2012 passed in HRC No 19/1996 (Asghar Khan Case). The review petition was returned to the advocate on record on November 17 due to the following reasons:
1) Security Challan amounting to Rs 10,000/- was not furnished, which is essentially required in a review petition under Rule 7 of Order XXVI of Supreme Court Rules, 1980 and without which no review petition can be entertained.
2) Memo of Civil Review Petition is also signed by some other person whose name is not mentioned.
3) Upon Memo of Review Petition name of Omar Hassan Sajjad, advocate was also mentioned as to have drawn/settled the Civil Review Petition, however, he is neither an advocate of the Supreme Court nor his attendance is marked upon the copy of order dated November 19, review of which is being sought.
The advocate on record removed all objections and re-filed the review petition on November 19, but sought two weeks time for filing paper books, which was allowed by the office of SC registrar.
Claiming injustice, Beg files review plea in SC for ‘fair trial’
