ISLAMABAD: The Special Court, hearing the high treason case against former military military ruler General ® Pervez Musharraf, on Tuesday issued a notice to the joint secretary of interior ministry on his failure to submit the list of properties owned by Pervez Musharaf. A three-judge bench of the Special Court headed by Justice Mazhar Alam Khan Miankhel and comprising Justice Tahira Safdar and Justice Yawar Ali on Wednesday resumed the hearing in the federation’s complaint seeking initiating a high treason case against former President General (Retd) Pervez Musharaf for imposing emergency rule on November 3 2007. The court in its order observed that despite clear cut directions, the list of properties of the accused, in the light of its order of May 11, 1016 had not been done. When the court asked the counsel for the complainant in this regard,, he submitted that the prosecution had properly conveyed to the ministry of interior at proper time. Meanwhile, when the court asked the Joint Secretary Ministry of Interior Dilshahd Ahmed Babar, he requested for some time to do the needful. He assumed the charge on May 25, 2016, having sufficient time to do the needful. When the ministry of interior which is also a complainant of the instant case, is itself reluctant to comply with the orders of the court and when the joint secretary, admittedly, is responsible not only in this regard but also for wasting the precious time of the court, the court is left with no option but to put the said joint secretary on a notice to explain his position as to why he should not be proceeded under Section 6 (2) of the Criminal Law Amendment (Special Court) Act, 1976. “Submit a reply in this regard within seven days positively, failing which, the law shall take its own course”, the court ruled in its order. The court also directed the prosecution counsel and the joint secretary ministry of interior to submit the list of all the properties, movable and immovable, belonging to the accused (Musharaf) on or before the date fixed and ruled that failing which, no leniency would be shown. The court further ruled that since, the accused had become a fugitive from law and all the legal formalities as required under Sections 204, 514 and 87 of the Cr,PC had been completed against him, the defence, present in the court was directed to assist it whether or not it could represent the accused anymore. The court in its order further ruled that the proclamation notice as required under Section 87 of the CrPC had been issued and served as directed and in this regard, the statement of Ilyas Ali, Inspector, FIA had been recorded as SW-4. The court observed that though the Director Legal, FIA was present before it but his statement in support of the report of process server, could not be recorded as the other process server, who served the Proclamation in Karachi, was not before it therefore, the director legal, present in the court was directed to ensure the presence of the said process server at the next date of hearing for recording the statement, whereafter, his statement would also be recorded. Later, the court adjourned the hearing till July 19. Earlier, at the outset of the hearing, the court asked Ahmed Raza Kasuri, the counsel for Pervez Musharaf as to whether his client (Musharaf) was not appearing before it intentionally. If so then he was no more required to appear before the court. Ahmed Raza Kasuri however, replied that they would not appear provided the court issued a written order in this regard. The court was informed that Prosecutor Muhammad Akram Sheikh could not appear before the court as he is out of the country.