LAHORE: A Lahore sessions court has issued a written order regarding Salman Haider’s interim bail. Salman Haider faces allegations of sexual assault. He is the cousin of famous Pakistani YouTuber Rajab Butt. This high-profile case has quickly caught the public’s attention.
The legal proceedings recently took an unexpected turn involving advanced technology. During a recent session, accusations arose regarding unauthorized digital recording inside the courtroom. Consequently, the judge took strict notice of the situation.
Court Demands Smart Glasses and Imposes Restrictions
The court directed Rajab Butt to produce Meta smart glasses at the next hearing. Furthermore, he must submit a written response regarding the alleged recording of courtroom proceedings. Officials want to investigate whether the content creator used wearable technology secretly during the trial.
Additionally, the judge issued clear orders to protect the digital evidence. The court also restrained Rajab Butt from deleting, editing, publishing or sending the alleged audio or video recording to anyone. This restriction ensures that the raw data remains completely safe for legal review.
Timeline for the Main Case
Meanwhile, the primary investigation against the main suspect is moving forward. According to the written order, a challan is being prepared for the main accused, Salman Haider, and will be submitted to the court within a month. Police must submit this official charge sheet before the formal trial begins.
The court said legal proceedings against the main accused would be completed first, after which the role of the other accused would be determined. Therefore, the judiciary will focus entirely on the core assault allegations before examining secondary offenses.
Preserving Courtroom Dignity
The legal system maintains strict rules regarding transparency and privacy during trials. Unauthorized filming can severely compromise sensitive legal matters. The hearing was adjourned until Aug. 18. The court said recording courtroom proceedings without permission could affect the delivery of justice and the dignity of the court.
