The court adjourned the hearing till April 30—Photo: File
Islamabad: The Islamabad High Court has raised the question in the cipher case against Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) founder Imran Khan and former foreign minister Shah Mehmood Qureshi that when the case was registered, other people had not returned copies of the cipher. His move was right.
A two-member bench of Islamabad High Court comprising Chief Justice Aamir Farooq and Justice Mian Gul Hasan Aurangzeb heard the appeals against the conviction of founder PTI and Shah Mehmood Qureshi in the cipher case.
Chief Justice Aamir Farooq questioned the Special Prosecutor of the Federal Investigation Agency (FIA) to the extent that you would admit that charges of deliberate non-return of the cipher copy and negligent loss could not be made simultaneously.
FIA Special Prosecutor Hamid Ali Shah said that when the cipher came to PTI founder, he deliberately kept it with himself, then negligently did not return the cipher copy.
The Islamabad High Court has raised the question that when the cipher case was registered, many other people also did not return the cipher copies, then filing a case only against the founder PTI means that it was right to keep the cipher of other people. .
The prosecutor replied that the rest of the individuals returned the cipher copies, we knew about founder PTI that they had lost the cipher copy, founder PTI deliberately kept the cipher copy and returned it negligently. did not The court has to see whether the copy of the cipher reached the accused or not.
The Chief Justice said, “You say that the PTI founder made this public, he did that, what has been made public, the cipher is not on the court record.
Justice Mian Gul Hasan Aurangzeb said that where is the recipient of the cipher document, he must have known the consequences of keeping the cipher pass, the document should have been given to the prime minister by the principal secretary of the prime minister.
The FIA prosecutor said that I will assist the court in this regard later. He said that the cipher is an accountable classified document. It was a classified document.
He said that the officer who received the cipher telegram said that he had downloaded it and put a number on it.
Justice Mian Gul Hasan Aurangzeb remarked, you are saying that one witness is saying this, another witness is saying that, then accept it, but the document is not on record, it is only that, the murder was not a dead body. But so and so is saying this and so and so is saying.
The prosecutor said that the cipher was in a crypto form and the other had a secret document number affixed to it.
The chief justice said what is meant by container, the prosecutor said the document was sent in a container which is a bag made of leather.
He said that the cipher copy is sent to inform him about taking action after reading the document, which was returned on his behalf when asked to return the cipher copies.
The prosecutor said that the cipher copy was not returned from Prime Minister House, we knew that the cipher copy was lost.
The FIA prosecutor told the court inquiry that he would complete the arguments in three to four hearings, after which the hearing was adjourned till April 30.
(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’));