Islamabad High Court;  Imran Khan's request for injunction on cipher trial rejected

Islamabad: The High Court rejected PTI’s founding chairman’s request for an injunction on the cipher trial.

Justice Mian Gul Hassan Aurangzeb heard the petition of founder chairman PTI Imran Khan against the December 12 order of the trial court in the cipher case. During the hearing, the court issued a notice on the application and sought a response.

The petitioner’s counsel requested the court to stay the trial, to which Justice Mian Gul Hasan Aurangzeb remarked that the notice was being issued, after which the court would look into the matter.

Ex-Chairman PTI’s lawyer Usman Riaz Gul read the order of December 12 in the court and opined that according to the requirement of sub-section 3 of Section 13, the trial court is not conducting judicial proceedings. The law mentions the word complaint, not FIR. This is a special law under which legal action is possible.

The court inquired what is your point? Which requirement is not met? On which the lawyer said that the action is proceeding under the FIR instead of the complaint which is not legally correct. Legally, the authorized officer of the government should have filed the complaint directly in the court, but here the complaint has not been filed but an FIR has been registered.

Justice Mian Gul Hasan Aurangzeb remarked that this notification fulfills the requirements of Section 13 (6). Lawyer Usman Riaz Gul said that the court could not understand this matter. Statements of 25 witnesses have been taken, 3 have been cross-examined. There are 28 witnesses in total. The lawyer pleaded that the court should stop the trial for a few days otherwise the trial court would take a final decision on the case as the trial was going on on a daily basis.

The court remarked that the notice will be issued first and then the court will look into it. The court rejected the plea of ​​founder PTI’s lawyer to issue an injunction on the cipher trial. On this occasion, FIA Prosecutor Rizwan Abbasi received the notice in the courtroom itself. Later, the court adjourned the hearing of the case.

(function(d, s, id){
var js, fjs = d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];
if (d.getElementById(id)) {return;}
js = d.createElement(s); js.id = id;
js.src = “//connect.facebook.net/en_US/sdk.js#xfbml=1&version=v2.3&appId=770767426360150”;
fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js, fjs);
}(document, ‘script’, ‘facebook-jssdk’));
(function(d, s, id) {
var js, fjs = d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];
if (d.getElementById(id)) return;
js = d.createElement(s); js.id = id;
js.src = “//connect.facebook.net/en_GB/sdk.js#xfbml=1&version=v2.7”;
fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js, fjs);
}(document, ‘script’, ‘facebook-jssdk’));

Please complete the required fields.
We are seeking your cooperation to ensure transparency, accuracy and accountability to our readership whenever we make an error or need to clarify /correct the post.




By admin

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *