ISLAMABAD: A local court on Saturday granted post-arrest bail to Barrister Hassaan Khan Niazi, the nephew and focal person of Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) Chairman Imran Khan, in a case registered against him for misbehaving with police and resisting the force at a security picket.
Judicial Magistrate Ihtasham Alam Khan, while announcing its reserved judgment, granted bail to Niazi against surety bonds of Rs30,000.
Qaiser Imam, Niazi’s counsel, while arguing over his client’s post-arrest bail application, read out the first information report (FIR) registered against PTI’s chairman nephew. The FIR was registered on the complaint of Assistant Sub-Inspector (ASI) at 1:pm, he said, adding that the FIR alleged that Niazi stepped out of the vehicle, verbally abused the police, and threatened to shoot them. The FIR further says that one of the accomplices of Niazi escaped from the scene while brandishing a pistol, he said, adding that his client had been falsely implicated in the case.
The judge inquired that did police made any recovery from the accused. To this, Niazi’s counsel said that nothing has been recovered from his client. The court after hearing the arguments reserved its judgment.
According to the order of the court, the defense counsel said that during the investigation no evidence came on the record against the present petitioner, which connects the petitioner with the alleged offense; that the facts as narrated in the FIR do not disclose any mens-rea on the part of petitioner and the offense level by the police against the present petitioner has no concern with the petitioner; that the offence mentions in the FIR does not fall within the ambit of prohibitory clause of section 497(1) CrPC.
It says that on the other hand, astonishingly no one appeared on behalf of the state to contest this bail petition. No doubt the petitioner/accused is nominated in the FIR but this court has to make a tentative assessment as per facts and circumstances of the case as to whether the case against the petitioners is made out or not, it says.
The court order says that the accused is nominated in FIR with the allegation that the accused scuffled with the police officials, tried to run over the vehicle on the police official with the intention to commit Qatl-e-Amd, and aimed a pistol at the police, broke the barriers and gave threats to the police officials for dire consequence. During the investigation, nothing could be brought on record against the present petitioner/accused by the investigation officer (IO) which could connect him with the commission of offense. No recovery of the weapon of offence has been made from the present accused. There is no direct or indirect evidence available on record which could prima facie corroborate the version of the FIR, it says.
“Only verbal allegation has been made which has not been corroborated by any type of evidence, therefore, in the circumstances, the case of the present petitioner is one of further inquiry,” it said.
The order further says that grant of bail in such cases is a rule and refusal is an exception. So, it will serve no fruitful purpose to keep the accused/petitioner behind the bars, therefore, the accused/petitioner is admitted to bail, subject to the furnishing of bail bonds in the sum of Rs30,000 with one local surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of this court.
Copyright Business Recorder, 2023
Comments
Comments are closed for this article.