ISLAMABAD: Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJP) Umar Atta Bandial on Wednesday remarked that the trial court judge hastily pronounced the Toshakhana case against former Prime Minister Imran Khan.
The Chief Justice’s remarks came before the Supreme Court during the hearing on the petition filed by Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) Chairman Khan challenging the decision of the Islamabad High Court (IHC) regarding the second transfer of the Toshakhana case. Came. Court
On August 4, the IHC set aside the session court’s decision to maintain the corruption case against the PTI chief in connection with the state gift hoard as an interim relief to him, but the matter was referred to another court. I rejected their request to transfer.
Later on August 5, Khan’s lawyer Khawaja Haris filed a petition in the Supreme Court against the IHC decision, with a diary number attached to the petition.
The former prime minister was found guilty of corruption in the Toshakhana case and sentenced to three years in prison.
The PTI chief’s application was heard by a three-member bench headed by Chief Justice Bandial, Justice Syed Mazahar Ali Akbar Naqvi and Justice Jamal Khan Mandukhel.
Today’s hearing
As soon as the hearing started, Imran Khan’s lawyer Latif Khosa presented his arguments in the court.
The Chief Justice expressed his anger over the decision of the trial court and said that the judge pronounced the order in haste.
Khosa had pleaded with the Supreme Court that his client had filed three appeals against the High Court order.
He said that six members of the National Assembly sent a reference against the PTI Chairman to the Speaker for his disqualification. “The Speaker then referred the reference under Section 137 of the Election Act to the Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP).”
Advocate Khosa pleaded with the court that his client is accused of misrepresenting his assets. On a query by Justice Naqvi, Khosa read Section 137 and Sub-Section 4 of the Election Act, 2017.
Do the members of the assembly have the power to send references against their fellow members? Justice Naqvi inquired. Under which law can assembly members send references against other members of parliament?
To which Khosa replied that the members of the assembly do not have the authority to send the reference, only the Speaker has the power to send the reference to the National Assembly. He further told the apex court that the electoral body can take action against an MNA only within 120 days of submission of financial returns.
Justice Mandukhel said that the present issue is not whether a reference could have been sent against the PTI chairman or not. You have challenged the decision of the Islamabad High Court.
Chief Justice Bandial also told lawyer Khosa that the jurisdictional issue of the case has been challenged.
The Chief Justice said that you yourself are saying that the case is being heard in another court.
At one point during the hearing, Chief Justice Bandial remarked that the trial court judge had decided the Toshakhana case in haste.
How many days did the trial court give to the accused for defense? The Chief Justice inquired.
The Chief Justice observed that the IHC had asked the court to decide the matter in seven days and the trial court decided it in a single day.
ECP lawyer Amjad Pervez said that Imran Khan still has forums to redress his grievances.
Justice Mandukhel said that it should be seen that justice is done.
Justice Naqvi remarked that the trial court violated the orders of the Supreme Court and the High Court in the Toshakhana case.
He further said that the right to produce witnesses cannot be taken away from an accused.
Chief Justice Bandial said in his remarks to the ECP lawyer that you are a fair lawyer. “Accused was not given adequate time to respond.”
The bench of the apex court further said that according to the details, no one appeared in the court to represent PTI on August 5.
The Supreme Court said, “On me, the trial court made a unilateral decision.
Additionally, the Supreme Court ordered the High Court to hear the plea seeking suspension of the sentence. He added that serious points have been raised before the court which need to be examined.
It is hoped that the High Court will decide on the petitions tomorrow.
The lawyer of Election Commission requested to adjourn the hearing till Friday.
“I work till 9 pm,” replied Chief Justice Bandial and adjourned the hearing till 2 pm tomorrow.
After hearing the arguments of Khosa and ECP counsel Amjad Pervaiz, Chief Justice Bandial remarked that ‘we will not interfere in the Toshakhana case today and we will look at the IHC hearing tomorrow and start the hearing again’. .
Petition
In his appeal, the PTI chairman requested the Supreme Court to set aside the High Court’s order directing Khan to reappear in the court of Additional Sessions Judge Humayun Dilawar.
He had prayed that the trial court should be restrained from proceeding on the new petition pending its decision.
The petition further argued that the trial judge had “wrongly and hastily” declared the Toshakhana case moot, and that the IHC had erred in law by remanding the case to Judge Dilawar.
“How can a judge who has declared a case admissible, freely re-hear it,” the petition said, adding that IHC Chief Justice Aamir Farooq in the latest order of the petitioner. has deprived him of his fundamental rights.
