LAHORE: A 2-judges bench of Lahore High Court on Monday decided to refer petition of Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) Imran Khan, seeking to halt “coercive government action” against PTI and quashment of multiple cases filed against him on identical charges, to a larger bench, and forwarded the file to the Chief Justice.
A two-judges bench headed by Justice Tariq Saleem Sheikh conducted the hearing into the PTI chief’s petition which was filed on Saturday, nominating nine authorities and individuals as respondents including the prime minister, interior minister, Punjab caretaker chief minister, inspector general of police Punjab, the National Accountability Bureau and the Federal Investigation Agency.
Justice Farooq Haider was also part of the bench.
During the course of hearing today, Khan’s counsel Barrister Salman Safdar said that new cases were being filed against his client with each passing day and that the state’s machinery was being misused.
He told the court that Imran Khan was facing over 140 cases filed by the police which were for political reasons. The counsel expressed concerns about Imran’s recent arrest and demanded that police high-ups appear in court to explain its necessity. According to the law, the reasons for the arrest must be explained. The counsel also pointed out that it would not be possible to pay fees for so many cases. Additionally, there are reports of a potential police operation at Imran’s Lahore residence at the end of Ramazan.
On this occasion, Imran Khan came to rostrum and said, “Last time you stopped the operation, but the police ransacked the house. I have confirmed information that the government plans to conduct another operation during Eid holidays.” He also mentioned that the same thing happened to Ali Zaidi, who was arrested without any case. Khan claimed that the government plans to go for another operation at Zaman Park residence, and thus, he requested the court to restrain them from any such adventure. Furthermore, he stated that the opponents are afraid of the elections and said, “They not only want to put me behind bars but also want to eliminate me.”
During the event, the lawyer representing the Punjab government questioned the maintainability of the petition. He argued that since there was an alternative forum, the petition could not even be filed in the High Court. Justice Tariq Saleem, who presided over the hearing, noted that the Prime Minister was made a respondent in the petition, which seemed incorrect.
Imran Khan, who was also present at the event, took the rostrum and recalled that despite court orders, the Punjab administration stormed his Zaman Park residence. He feared that this could lead to bloodshed and requested that they refrain from such practices in the future.
After hearing the arguments, Justice Tariq Saleem announced a short break. When the court resumed, the bench decided to refer the matter to the Chief Justice to be taken up by a larger bench.
Khan’s Petition:
The plea seeking court directions against the government’s action targeting the ex-PM pointed out that “more than 100 politically motivated and unlawful FIRs” had been lodged against Imran while “100s of fabricated FIRs” had been filed against the leaders and workers of the PTI.
The plea said thousands of workers had been picked up and illegally detained, while the whereabouts of many were unknown, noting that the action amounted to grave violations of the petitioner’s rights.
“The petitioner seeks the protection of this honourable court from the most audacious assault on fundamental rights launched by any executive of this country in furtherance of the most constitutionally abhorrent objective: to prevent or delay elections required by the Constitution in order to ensure that the largest ’ political party in Pakistan may be prevented from participating or winning such elections.”
The plea went on to say that the “extraordinary nature of the attack on fundamental rights of one of the largest political parties of the country involved violations of their rights to life and liberty, fair trial, dignity and privacy of home, movement, assembly, association, speech, and equal treatment guaranteed under Article 9, 10A, 14, 15, 16, 17, 19, and 25 of the Constitution meant that the intervention of the court is required in order to protect and enforce the said fundamental rights and the rule of law”.
According to the petition, “Despite the fact that none of the tactics such as false criminal cases, edited and inauthentic audio leaks, custodial torture of Petitioner’s political associates, suppression of the coverage of the Petitioner and elimination of the voices in support, worked to diminish the popularity of the Petitioner, the Respondents did not end the matter there.”
Quoting an assassination attempt on the former premier in November last year, the plea pointed out that there was an attempt to assassinate the petitioner on Nov 3, 2022, during a political procession in Wazirabad.
“In the incident, the petitioner narrowly escaped the attempt on his life, although he received two firearm injuries and had to be rushed to the hospital. As many as 13 other individuals were injured and one innocent person lost his life. The incident resulted in the petitioner having severe mobility issues until he had fully recovered from the injuries.”
The plea urged the court to issue directions that the unprecedented repeated abuse and misuse of criminal law machinery of the state to register criminal cases against the PTI chief amounted to causing grave, and illegal violation of the Petitioner’s fundamental rights under Articles 10A, 15, 16, 17, 19, 19-A, and 25 of the Constitution.
It also sought the court’s directions that “the undue haste in seeking the apprehension and arrest of Imran is a grave violation of his right to life and liberty”.
The PTI chief also, in his plea, urged the court that the “practice of lodging different FIRs all over Pakistan over the same occurrence and practice of unnecessarily prolonging the incarceration of an accused by transferring them from one jurisdiction to another is a deliberate and male fide violation of fundamental rights and respondents be restrained from taking such steps.”
The plea said urged the court that no “coercive action” should be taken against the petitioner and his party in pursuance of all the FIRs /call-up notices.
