ISLAMABAD - Former Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif on Saturday filed an application for hearing his appeal against the Supreme Court registrar office over the rejection of his petition seeking to club all three references against him in the accountability court.

Earlier on October 13, Sharif filed the constitutional petition under Article 184(3) of Constitution in the apex court through Khawaja Haris, seeking court directives for the National Accountability Court (NAB) to club the three references against him. However, the registrar office on October 20 returned the former premier’s petition for not being maintainable. The registrar office order said the former prime minister has already exhausted all legal remedies available to him in the apex court. The registrar office had also said that Sharif had not approached any other appropriate forum available to him under the law for the same relief. He has also not provided any justification for not doing so, the registrar office.

On October 24, Sharif again filed an appeal with the apex court, challenging the registrar office objections. He had prayed the court to set aside the registrar office order and direct the office to assign a number to his constitutional petition and fix it for hearing before a bench of the Supreme Court.

In his petition of October 13, the former PM contended that he should be tried through a single reference, irrespective of the number of assets alleged to have been held by him on any such date that the reference was filed against him.

The former PM had filed the petition under Article 184(3) of Constitution and made the Federation through the Secretary Ministry of Law and Justice, the NAB chairman, the accountability court, Hassan, Hussain, Maryam Nawaz and Capt (retd) Muhammad Safdar as respondents.

In the petition, he had requested the court to declare the July 28 judgment in Panama Papers case, wherein NAB had been directed to file three references against the former PM, per incurium for being repugnant to Article 4,9,10-A, 13 and 25 of the Constitution.

The appeal said that the SC registrar order was misconceived and baseless. “There is no bar in the law or the Constitution that may prevent a citizen from approaching the august court by invoking Article 184(3) against any judicial pronouncement, which is per incurium,” the appeal said. It said that the apex court has unlimited jurisdiction under the constitutional provisions, and has the obligations, to intervene, at any stage and time, irrespective of the source through which such information regarding such judicial pronouncement is brought to the court notice and correct any judgment which is per incurium.

In his petition, Sharif had asked the court to declare that the multiple trials on a single charge would prejudice his fundamental rights to be dealt with in accordance with law, fair trial and protection against double punishment, guaranteed under Articles 4, 10-A and 13 of the Constitution.

Sharif had requested the court to suspend accountability court proceedings in references against him till the filing of a consolidated reference by the NAB in respect of the alleged commission of an offence under Section 9 (a)(v) of NAO, 1999. The petition had stated that the filing of multiple references against an accused for each asset allegedly owned, possessed or acquired by him, disproportionate to his known sources of income, was repugnant to section 9 (a)(v) of the NAO, 1999.