Islamabad Court approves judicial remand for Gill, rejects extension in physical remand

  • Police had lodged plea for extension in physical remand
Updated 12 Aug, 2022

An Islamabad Court on Friday approved the judicial remand for former special assistant to prime minister for political communication Dr Shahbaz Gill who was arrested in a sedition case.

The court rejected police’s request for extension in the physical remand and Gill has now been sent to jail. After the end of the two-day physical remand, the police had lodged a plea for its extension. However, the court turned down the request for an extension in physical remand.

Earlier on Friday, the Islamabad Court began hearing the case and reserved the verdict on the plea lodged by the police.

Islamabad court grants two-day physical remand of PTI’s Shahbaz Gill

On August 10, the court had granted police two-day physical remand of Gill. During the hearing on Wednesday, the police requested a 14-day remand of the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) leader, saying that they still need to recover Gill’s mobile phone. The police also said that they need to investigate at whose behest the TV programme was aired on which the statements were made.

On August 9, Gill was arrested by Islamabad Police outside Banigala Chowk for “making statements against state institutions and inciting the people to rebellion.”

Another case registered against Shahbaz Gill

A case was registered against the PTI leader at the Kohsar Police Station, Islamabad. Besides other charges, clauses relating to inciting people against the state institutions and their heads were added in the FIR.

Taking to Twitter, PTI Chairman Imran Khan said “this is an abduction not an arrest. Can such shameful acts take place in any democracy?”

After Islamabad, another case was registered in Karachi against the PTI leader.

The second case was registered at the Malir Memon Goth Police Station. Provision of sedition, inciting the public against the state institutions, spreading anarchy and hatred are included in the case.’

Read Comments