Summons record from lower court saying it will first hear ECP stance in the case n Seeks report about sending Imran to Attock jail instead of Adiala prison n SC orders not to arrest PTI chief in lawyer murder case until Aug 24.
ISLAMABAD - The Islamabad High Court (IHC) Wednesday issued notices to respondent in an appeal of PTI chief Imran Khan against his conviction in the Toshakhana criminal case.
A division bench of IHC comprising Chief Justice of IHC Justice Aamer Farooq and Justice Tariq Mahmood Jahangiri conducted hearing of the petition moved by Imran Khan who filed the petition through his counsels including Barrister Ali Zafar, Sardar Latif Khosa Advocate, Babar Awan, Salman Akram Raja Advocate, Shoaib Shaheen Advocate, Barrister Gohar Ali Khan Advocate and others while he cited district election commissioner as respondent.
In this matter, the IHC bench also sought the case record from the trial court and said that it would first hear the stance of the Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP) against the appeal.
During the hearing, Sardar Latif Khosa Advocate representing Khan contended that the trial court did not fulfil the requirement of fair trial in the case referring different Articles and sections of the Constitution.
He said that the trial court had awarded maximum sentence to former prime minister as per the charges in the case and the trial court had announced the verdict despite Imran’s appeal against abolishing of his right of defence was pending before the high court. However, the IHC Chief Justice refused to suspend the sentence and remarked that first, the bench would hear the stance of the ECP and then would decide the matter. The counsel requested the court to fix the case today again for further hearing. Another counsel for Imran, Khawaja Haris argued that the IHC had ordered the trial court to decide the matter related to maintainability of the case on daily basis but the trial court announced its verdict on the third day without hearing the defence counsel. He said that he had reached the trial court before the announcement of the verdict but it refused to hear him.
Justice Aamer remarked that the court had served notices in the appeal and then he would also view these points. He remarked that hearing on this appeal was not possible today as he would be on leave.
He observed that the case would not be prolonged till after the vacations as the appeal related to the sentences and bails are being fixed early. After this, the court adjourned further hearing of the case.
Meanwhile, the IHC issued directives seeking response from the authorities to apprise it who had ordered to keep Imran Khan in Attock jail instead of Adiala Jail. A single bench of IHC comprising Chief Justice of IHC Justice Aamer Farooq issued these directives. In his petition, Khan’s counsel invoked the constitutional jurisdiction of this court for transfer of his client from Attock Jail to Central Jail Adiala, Rawalpindi and for all the facilities as per his entitlement under the relevant law.
The counsel for the petitioner contended that the petitioner is currently serving sentence awarded by Additional Sessions Judge, Islamabad vide order dated August 5. He contended that committal orders were for Central Jail Adiala, Rawalpindi whereas the petitioner has been confined at Attock Jail without any justification or basis.
He also argued that the petitioner is also not being afforded the class of prison to which he is entitled under the law and access to family and lawyers.
On court’s call, additional attorney general Imran Shaukat Rao Punjab, Syed Ahsan Raza Kazmi, DAG and Zohaib Hassan Gondal, State Counsel appeared in the court and sought time for obtaining instructions.
During the hearing, the IHC bench also directed the assistant advocate general to find out about the authority responsible for determining the prisoner’s transfer and submit a report by tomorrow. Justice Aamer said that due to the absence of a jail in Islamabad, prisoners are accommodated in Rawalpindi’s Adiala jail. However, he inquired about the method of sending a prisoner to the other jails.
Meanwhile, the Supreme Court of Pakistan ordered that PTI Chairman Imran Khan should not be arrested in advocate Abdul Razzaq Shar murder case until August 24. A three-member bench of the apex court headed by Justice Yahya Afridi, and comprising Justice Sayyed Mazahar Ali Akbar Naqvi and Justice Syed Hasan Azhar Rizvi conducted hearing of the former prime minister’s appeal against the order of a division bench of the Balochistan High Court (BHC). During the hearing, the complainant’s lawyer Amanullah Kanrani showed distrust on Justice Naqvi and Justice Rizvi and levelled serious allegations against them. He said that Justice Naqvi, while hearing the case of Lahore CCPO Ghulam Mehmood case had taken suo moto regarding general elections in the Punjab, while a case against Justice Rizvi is pending before the Sindh High Court (SHC).
Kanrani said that when he asked the bench that it was not hearing the case on merit then both these judges got annoyed with him. At this, Justice Rizvi inquired that how could he commit character assassination of the bench members? He questioned which case against him is pending before the SHC, and then asked him to provide evidence otherwise they would issue him contempt of court notice.
Justice Naqvi said that who had allowed him to talk to the judges in this tone? When Kanrani was about to take his seat, Justice Yahya called him on the rostrum and told him if he had objections against the judges then he could have given that in writing. He further told the complainant’s lawyer that he should not have addressed the bench in that way. Justice Mazahar Naqvi asked the counsel to prove his allegations, adding; “We are not weak.” Kanrani replied; “Judge sahib don’t shout at me; as I am not your slave.” Justice Naqvi then remarked; “Are we your slave?”
Justice Yahya asked Kanrani to tender unconditional apology otherwise they would not hear him. Upon that Kanrani verbally apologized to the court, but said if the judges become party then he would speak. He further said if the judges want to become party then they should relinquish their seat. Justice Yahya directed Karani to file written apology. A division bench of the BHC comprising Chief Justice Naeem Afghan and Justice Aamir Nawaz Rana on 15-06-23 had dismissed the PTI chief’s application to quash an FIR registered on the complaint of the slain lawyer’s son. In the FIR Imran Khan was nominated regarding the assassination of Shar. Earlier, Advocate Sardar Latif Khosa, representing Imran Khan, argued that his client had been arrested in another case. He told that the lawyers were allowed to meet Imran Khan in the jail. Upon that Justice Yahya said that the other case was not before the court, and asked Khosa to focus on the instant matter.