LAHORE: The legal team of incarcerated PTI founding chairman Imran Khan on Monday withdrew his petitions against the denial of pre-arrest bail in May 9 riots cases related to the burning of Jinnah House, Askari Tower, and Shadman police station.
While hearing the petition, a two-member bench of the Lahore High Court comprising Justice Tariq Saleem Sheikh and Justice Anwarul Haq Pannun questioned the counsel about the maintainability of the petitions for bail before arrest when the petitioner had already been arrested in the cases.
The lawyer claimed that the PTI founding chairman was not arrested when these petitions were filed. However, the bench noted that his claim did not match the record of registrar office.
Subsequently, the bench observed the petitions stood “infructuous”.
LHC to hear Imran’s challenge to his remand in eight riot cases today after objection overruled
At this, Advocate Usman Riaz, the counsel for Imran Khan, sought court’s permission to withdraw the petitions.
The bench allowed the request and disposed of the petitions as withdrawn.
Leader of the Opposition in Punjab Assembly Malik Ahmad Khan Bachar also attended the court hearing.
Objection overruled
The same bench overruled registrar’s objection to Mr Khan’s petition challenging his physical remand in eight cases related to the May 9 riots and instructed the office to fix it for hearing on Tuesday.
The registrar office had objected to the unavailability of attested copies of the necessary documents.
The petition, filed through Barrister Salman Safdar, argued that an anti-terrorism court granted Mr Khan’s custody to police on July 15 in a hearing which he attended on a Whatsapp video call from Adiala jail, Rawalpindi. It stated that the order issued by the ATC was tantamount to ‘misreading’ established principles on the law of remand and urged the court to set it aside for being ‘unlawful’.
The petition stated that the remand was ‘unjustifiable’ as the sole allegation against the petitioner was of abetment and conspiracy and his participation in the investigation was not required as the FIR was ‘wholly silent about his specific role’.
It further said the prosecution didn’t arrest the petitioner for more than a year after May 9, 2023, even when the police authorities knew he was under the custody of state at Adiala jail.
The petition said the FIR contained allegations related to public protests following the ex-premier’s arrest, and when the said offences for which he has been charged occurred, he was ‘absolutely incommunicado’ as he was in the ‘unlawful custody’ of NAB. It asked the LHC to set aside the trial court order and declare the physical remand ‘illegal’.
Details of cases sought
Separately, the jailed wife of the ex-premier, Bushra Bibi, filed a petition in the Lahore High Court seeking details of cases against her.
In her petition, Bushra Bibi said being housewife, she had no involvement in political matters. Yet cases had been registered against her on political grounds as part of victimisation, she argued.
The petitioner expressed concern that inquiries and cases had been initiated against her, but no information was being provided about them. She sought details of the initiated inquiries and FIRs and urged the court to ensure that she may not be arrested in any further case or inquiry, not known to her legal team till date.
Published in Dawn, July 23rd, 2024
