ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court directed the Attorney General for Pakistan to file a report on the living conditions of Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf(PTI) Chairman Imran Khan in jail by Monday (August 28).
A three-member bench, headed by Chief Justice Umar Ata Bandial, and comprising Justice Mazahar Ali Akbar Naqvi and Justice Jamal Khan Mandokhail, on Thursday, heard Imran Khan’s petition against the Islamabad High Court (IHC)’s order.
The court said, “Attorney General for Pakistan shall file a report on the living conditions of the petitioner (Imran Khan) in jail by 28.08.2023 for perusal by Members of the Bench in Chambers.”
During the hearing, CJP Bandial noted that the IHC hearing was going on. “The high court is finding a solution in the matter. This is the beauty of our system,” he said.
The chief justice said there was no need to duplicate the proceedings when the high court is hearing the case. “Let the high court’s decision come. We will hear the plea [filed in the SC] after that,” he added and adjourned the hearing until the IHC’s decision.
When Justice Naqvi inquired what would be the fate of the case at the high court, Khosa responded that he had no knowledge. “My job is to put in the best effort and it was the job of the court to do justice,” he said.
A division bench of the IHC comprising Justice Aamir Farooq and Justice Tariq Mahmood Jahangiri on Thursday resumed hearing of the former prime minister Imran Khan’s petition against Additional District and Sessions Judge Humayun Dilawar’s judgment dated 5th August 2023. It adjourned the matter until Friday (today) as the Election Commission of Pakistan’s counsel Amjad Pervaiz wanted to further argue on the points raised by the petitioner’s lawyers.
The court discouraged senior counsel Sardar Latif Khosa from narrating his experience about his recent meeting with his client Imran Khan in jail.
“Still the counsel was successful in blurting out during his meeting with his client, daring police personnel in uniform was sitting right between us in breach of the client-counsel privileged conversation.”
As a counsel this is my fundamental right to have a meeting with the client in complete privacy, the counsel emphasized.
Justice Jamal Khan Mandokhel emphasized that the high courts or the civil courts were not subordinate to the Supreme Court. They are independent courts and their independence should be respected, Justice Mandokhel observed, also regretting that the respect of both the Bench and the Bar were dependent on each other.
Meanwhile, the Pakistan Bar Council (PBC) asked the Supreme Court that there should be no “interference” in matters pending before the subordinate judiciary.
PBC Executive Committee Chairman Hassan Raza Pasha said that the main appeal against Imran’s conviction was not fixed before the SC.
“But yesterday’s remarks by the SC which we saw and heard, it seemed as if the whole appeal was decided, and we saw criminal jurisprudence changing,” he said.
“It seems as if there is no trust left in the honourable high court judges. They are also equally honourable and respectable judges, and are passing verdicts according to their conscience … it amounts to interference in the smooth functioning of the high court, appellate court,” Pasha said.
“What decision will the high court make?” he asked.
He noted that the lawyers of a certain political party, an apparent reference to the PTI, were saying that the SC’s observations had amounted to an acquittal.
“So will it be inferred that he was acquitted due to the SC’s pressure? And if they don’t, which high court or subordinate judiciary can make a decision either way in light of these observations?” he asked.
He said that the PBC respected the apex court and they did not want the court’s esteem to suffer. “There should be no interference in matters pending in the high court,” he said, adding that any interference was unfair to the other party in the case.
Copyright Business Recorder, 2023