ISLAMABAD: The Islamabad High Court (IHC), Wednesday, reserved its verdict on Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) founder Imran Khan’s petitions against his jail trial notification in Toshkhana and Al-Qadir cases.
A division bench of Chief Justice Aamer Farooq and Justice Tariq Mahmood Jahangiri heard Imran’s petitions against his jail trial notification in Toshkhana and Al-Qadir cases. Imran filed the petitions through his counsel Sardar Latif Khosa advocate and cited the chairman National Accountability Bureau (NAB) and others as respondents in the case.
During the hearing, Imran’s counsel Advocate Shoaib Shaheen argued that they did not say that the jail trial could not be conducted but certain parameters [for it] were necessary.
He said the jail trial was held in extraordinary circumstances, which required a judicial order in which the relevant judge stated those extraordinary circumstances.
The attorney general for Pakistan (AGP) contended that the trial of NAB cases was being conducted in an open court at the Adiala prison, where the former prime minister remained incarcerated.
Shaheen contended that the NAB had no authority to write to the federal government seeking a jail trial. He added that if the NAB had any reason, it should have placed them before the relevant court and then the court would have decided after looking at these circumstances.
He continued that a two-member bench of the IHC had given a decision on the same legal point in the cypher case, which had not been overruled by the Supreme Court and was binding on this court
as well.
AGP Mansoor Usman Awan informed the court that there were Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube screenshots that proved the media was being given access to the trial. Shoaib argued that there was no court order related to the jail trial. He said a notification was issued when the references had not even been filed, arguing that the malice was clear.
At this, the IHC CJ said there was no doubt that the jail trial was conducted in extraordinary circumstances. Later, the court reserved its verdict on the petitions.
Imran’s petition stated that the notifications of jail trials in the cases, issued on November 14 and 28, respectively, were unlawful and malicious. He prayed to the court that the jail trial notifications be nullified and urged the court to issue a stay order to halt the proceedings.
In his petition, the petitioner, Imran, impugned the notification dated 28.11.2023 issued by the Ministry of Law and Justice, according to which, the federal government had accorded approval that the “Accountability Court concerned” shall sit and conduct trial of the petitioner and others in Central Prison, Adiala Rawalpindi with reference to the case regarding misuse of authority and misappropriation/illegal sale of gifted State assets, etc. under Section 16(b) of the National Accountability Ordinance, 1999.
Copyright Business Recorder, 2024
Comments
Comments are closed for this article.