• The Supreme Court will hear the PTI leader’s plea on the need for physical custody to complete the investigation today.
• Supreme Court moves for early hearing of PTI’s appeal challenging High Court’s rejection of de-notification plea of 123 MNAs
ISLAMABAD: The Islamabad High Court (IHC) on Thursday finally granted bail to PTI leader Dr Shahbaz Gul after his arrest and ordered his release on a surety bond of Rs 50 lakh.
The PTI chairman’s chief of staff has been named as an accused in the First Information Report (FIR) filed against him for allegedly inciting mutiny within the armed forces during an interview with a TV channel.
Meanwhile, the Supreme Court (today) will consider Gill’s plea on Friday asking whether physical custody of an accused was necessary to complete investigations in criminal cases.
At the IHC, Gill’s counsel Barrister Salman Safdar mainly argued that no offense was committed against his client and that the registration of the criminal case was politically motivated and mala fide.
Special prosecutor Raja Rizwan Abbasi argued that Gill’s speech aired by ARY News was sufficient to attract the offenses listed in the FIR. He tried to incite members of the armed forces to disobey the lawful orders of their superiors and thereby commit mutiny.
In response to a court query, the Special Prosecutor admitted that during the investigation, no incriminating material could be gathered to show that before or after giving the statement, Gill had spoken to any officer or other member of the armed forces. had contacted in an attempt to encourage or provoke him;
He said that Section 131 of the PPC clearly states that when a person encourages the commission of mutiny by any officer, soldier, sailor or airman in the Army, Navy or Air Force or any such officer tries to sway his loyalty or duty The prosecutor also submitted a transcript of Gill’s statement to the court.
IHC Chief Justice Athar Minullah noted: “Such reckless statements were not expected from a person who claims to be an academic and is declared as the spokesperson of a political party.”
The Chief Justice pointed out that the trial court was satisfied that apart from the offense mentioned under Section 131, the other offenses mentioned in the FIR were not prima facie attracted. He also observed that the prosecution has not brought any material on record to show that any complaint was received by or on behalf of the armed forces. He added that the discipline of the armed forces is not weak or weak enough to be swayed or affected by the “reckless and irresponsible statements” of those claiming to be political leaders.
Despite Gill’s reckless statements, a case was made out for further inquiry as there was a need to investigate whether the offenses mentioned in the FIR would be attracted on the basis of speech alone.
“The investigation has been completed and there is no need to further imprison Shahbaz Gul,” the court order said. It will be tantamount to punishing him before. Further, nothing could be brought on record to convince the court that Gill would repeat the crime, tamper with evidence, influence witnesses or abscond if released on bail. will be done.
Custody in criminal cases
Meanwhile, a three-member bench of the Supreme Court comprising Justice Ijaz-ul-Ahsan, Justice Syed Mazahar Ali Akbar Naqvi and Justice Jamal Khan Mandukhel will hear the challenging petition filed by senior advocate Barrister Salman Safdar on August 11 on behalf of Dr. Shahbaz Gul. will 18 The IHC order referring the remand matter to the Additional Sessions Judge, Islamabad extended his physical custody.
The petition also raised the question of whether the approval of the federal government, as stated by the Supreme Court in the 2016 Mustafa Impex case, was a prerequisite for registration of a criminal case for rebellion and sedition, and whether its Absence of authorization, the Federal Cabinet will invalidate the arrest, detention and remand, causing serious miscarriage of justice.
He also questioned whether the 14-day remand and physical custody of an accused in the present sedition and sedition case was justified when the charges mainly revolved around a speech.
And whether the alleged torture and physical abuse during police custody and interrogation can be justified under the Constitution as well as under the CrPC as well as the Police Rules, the petition questioned whether the Chief of Police could IHC order to set up probe into allegations? Torture and physical abuse by the police under his command may ensure the discovery of the truth.
Challenge to rejection of IHC application
Separately, the PTI had on September 6 rejected a plea to the IHC for early hearing of its challenge seeking a direction to the Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP) to de-notify its 123 MNAs. had gone
The petition filed by senior advocate Faisal Farid also requested the apex court to fix the matter on September 16 as the ECP had announced the by-elections while the commission had 60 days to hold elections on all the vacant seats. was bound to He also pleaded that the acceptance of resignations of PTI legislators and elections to a few seats were based on “colorful use of power”.
