The Anti-Terrorism Court of Lahore gave a reserved verdict on the bail applications of Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) founder chairman Imran Khan in 8 cases on May 9.
The anti-terrorism court in Lahore rejected the bails of Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) founder in the Jinnah House attack and May 9 eight cases. Judge Manzar Ali Gul gave a reserved verdict on the bails.
Anti-Terrorism Court Judge Manzar Ali Gul heard former Prime Minister Imran Khan’s bail pleas in 8 cases on May 9. Founding Chairman PTI’s lawyer Barrister Salman Safdar appeared in the court.
Founder PTI had filed bails in the Jinnah House attack, Shadman police station arson cases and the burning of police vehicles at Rahat Bakery Chowk and Zaman Park. Apart from this, founder PTI also filed bails in the Askari Tower attack and three other May 9 cases, which were rejected by the court.
Report of the hearing
Barrister Salman Safdar while arguing in the court said that the wrong reaction to the opinion of PTI founder came from the people. I have represented founder PTI in more than 240 cases. All kinds of cases were registered against one accused. There is no section under which a case has not been registered. Cypher’s case went to the Supreme Court, all others got relief from subordinate courts.
The lawyer said that in 30 cases decisions have been made against the government. I am placing before you about 25 decisions. The plaintiffs in each case are policemen. The government has thrown googly, leg break, off break second third. Sometimes they say that the conspiracy took place in this way, then they say that it did not take place in this way. Bushra Bibi was included in 12 cases that she was also involved in the conspiracy. It is easy to accuse and difficult to prove.
Barrister Salman Safdar said that I am not asking you for discharge or dismissal of the case. You cannot even provide these facilities. The accused has been in jail for a long time, I am asking the court for bail.
The lawyer argued that Pervez Musharraf’s medical records were presented, he had to leave the world to prove them true. After that everyone was convinced that all the medicals were correct. Judges have relayed PTI founder’s detention in NAB custody from May 9 to 12.
Later, Special Prosecutor Rao Abdul Jabbar said in his arguments that all the cases are of rebellion against the government and attack on sensitive installations. The judgments presented are not related to these cases. According to British law, the King is not impeachable. The accused is not a king. At the behest of the accused, 200 installations were attacked. It was said on social media that today is the day of real jihad. Indian TV channels also continued to run the same news.
The prosecutor added in the arguments that the general public is prohibited from visiting certain places in Kent. Everyone has a modern device that communicates location and messages. How PC Hotel, Awari Hotel or milk shop in Anarkali was not attacked. Military installations were attacked. The statue of Colonel Sher Khan Shaheed, who sacrificed his life for the safety of the country, was kicked. These wars and attacks continue even today. The ranger and the policeman were martyred, while the accused says that I am in jail.
While giving arguments in the court on behalf of the prosecution, it was further said that the accused was not in jail on May 7 when the conspiracy took place, the application of the accused should be dismissed.
Later, the court reserved its judgment after completing the arguments on the bail pleas of the prosecution and the accused’s counsel.
#Major #verdict #Imran #Khans #bail #pleas #cases #Pakistan
Is the use of numerous legal cases against Imran Khan a unique tactic in Pakistani politics, or are there historical precedents for such a strategy?
## Interview with Legal Analyst on Imran Khan’s Bail Rejection
**Host:** Welcome back to the show. Today we’re discussing the recent bail rejection for former Prime Minister Imran Khan in eight cases related to the May 9th protests. Joining us is legal analyst Alex Reed, who is an expert on Pakistani law and politics. Thank you for joining us.
**Alex Reed:** Thank you for having me.
**Host:** So, let’s dive right in. The Lahore Anti-Terrorism Court rejected Imran Khan’s bail pleas in cases related to the Jinnah House attack, arson, and the burning of police vehicles. Can you explain what led to this decision?
**Alex Reed:** This decision comes after a lengthy hearing where Khan’s lawyer, Barrister Salman Safdar, argued passionately for his release. Safdar highlighted the sheer number of cases filed against Khan, claiming many are without merit. He also pointed out the contradictions in the government’s narrative surrounding the May 9th events.
**Host:** Safdar mentioned over 240 cases filed against Khan. That does seem excessive. How common is this type of legal pressure on political opponents in Pakistan?
**Alex Reed:** Unfortunately, using the legal system to target political opponents is not unheard of in Pakistan. However, the sheer volume of cases against Imran Khan is unprecedented. It raises concerns about the potential abuse of the judicial process for political ends.
**Host:** You mentioned contradictions in the government’s narrative. Can you elaborate on that?
**Alex Reed:** Yes, Safdar pointed out that the government has been shifting its story about the May 9th protests, making it difficult to establish a clear understanding of what transpired. This inconsistency weakens the prosecution’s case.
**Host:** What does this bail rejection mean for Imran Khan’s future?
**Alex Reed:** This is a major setback for Khan. He will remain incarcerated as these cases move forward, which could take considerable time. It will also likely further inflame tensions between his supporters and the government.
**Host:** Lastly, what do you see as the broader implications of this case for Pakistan’s democracy?
**Alex Reed:** This case highlights the ongoing struggle for the rule of law and fair treatment in Pakistani politics. If political opponents can be targeted and imprisoned without due process, it undermines the foundation of a democratic society.
**Host:** Thank you for sharing your insights on this important issue, Alex Reed. We appreciate your time.
