ISLAMABAD: Following a short order from the Islamabad High Court (IHC), a district and sessions court in the federal capital resumed the hearing of the Toshakhana case against former prime minister Imran Khan.
Earlier today, the Islamabad High Court (IHC) overturned the trial court’s ruling, which had declared the Toshakhana case against the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) chairman as maintainable. IHC Chief Justice Aamer Farooq issued a short order, instructing the local court to reevaluate the matter and make a new decision after hearing the case.
At the beginning of today’s hearing, Judge Humayun Dilawar from the local court inquired Barrister Gohar Ali, who is representing Imran Khan, about the updates regarding the case in the high court.
The lawyer replied, “After approving the plea relating to the maintainability matter, the high court again sent the case to the sessions court.”
In the court, Barrister Gohar Ali, representing Imran Khan, fervently requested an exemption for his client from appearing personally.
IHC Directs Imran Khan’s Appearance in Toshakhana Case; ECP’s Witty Remark Amuses Court
Simultaneously, Amjad Parvez, the lawyer representing the Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP), stated that the trial court had served notices to the relevant parties in the reference filed by the election watchdog. The reference pertains to the trial of the deposed prime minister, who was removed from office via a no-confidence motion in April of the previous year. Mr. Parvez further added that the Islamabad High Court (IHC) had not issued any stay order in connection with this matter.
“The PTI chairman’s requests for transfer of case has also been rejected,” Parvez added. Furthermore, he informed that specific instructions have been issued to the Federal Investigation Agency (FIA) concerning the fake Facebook posts.
“And what about those who have floated fake Facebook posts?” asked the judge.
“You fall in love with those who wave Facebook posts,” The ECP counsel made a witty remark, which filled the court with laughter.
The judge noted that the Election Commission of Pakistan’s (ECP) counsel had finished presenting their arguments. He directed Imran Khan’s lawyer to present his arguments at 8:30 am tomorrow (Friday). The reference pertains to the trial of the deposed prime minister, whom the parliament removed from office via a no-confidence motion in April of the previous year.
Simultaneously, the court summoned the PTI chairman to appear in person tomorrow and adjourned the hearing. The judge issued a warning that the court would reserve its verdict if the defendant’s counsel fails to attend the hearing tomorrow.
IHC voids sessions court’s verdict
Today, the Islamabad High Court (IHC) declared the sessions court’s maintainability verdict in the Toshakhana case as “void.” The ruling came after arguments from both parties were completed yesterday, and the judgment was reserved.
The IHC rejected the PTI chairman’s request to transfer the case to another court and confirmed that Additional Sessions Judge Humayun Dilawar would continue hearing the case.
Additionally, the court issued a notice to investigate the alleged Facebook post made by the district and sessions judge.
The ECP had previously disqualified the former prime minister under Article 63(1)(p) of the Constitution for making false statements about gifts. Subsequently, the ECP filed a case in the sessions court seeking criminal proceedings against the PTI chief for misleading the ECP.
The IHC had overturned the sessions court’s initial ruling, directing it to hear the petitioner and decide within seven days. The sessions court then declared the Toshakhana case as maintainable, a decision that was challenged in the IHC.
Meanwhile, during the trial, Khan’s lawyers accused the presiding judge of bias based on his Facebook posts and requested a case transfer.
The trial court also rejected the PTI chairman’s witnesses, stating their lack of relevance to the criminal proceedings, which was also challenged in the high court.
As of now, the trial is approaching its conclusion.
Explanation for rehearing
The bench ruled that Khan’s repeated adjournment requests during the trial indicated that the case should be reheard. However, they found no necessity for transferring the case to a different court.
“The order […] shows that a number of opportunities were provided to the petitioner to address arguments but adjournments were sought, hence the matter was decided in the absence of learned counsel for the petitioner.”
“…so the learned counsel for the petitioner is correct in saying that he has been condemned unheard and it would be only appropriate to remand the matter back to the Trial Court for decision afresh,” the order mentioned.
The order emphasized that there is no essential requirement to transfer the matter to a different judge. It stated that remitting the case to a different jurist can be considered a matter of propriety rather than a principle of law.
“However, in the instant case even remanding the matter to a different court is not mandated.”
Petition dismissed by top court
Earlier today, the Supreme Court dismissed the ex-prime minister’s petition against the trial proceedings of the Toshakhana case after he withdrew the plea.
A three-member bench, led by Justice Yahya Afridi and comprising Justice Hasan Azhar Rizvi and Justice Musarat Hilali, heard Imran Khan’s petition concerning the Toshakhana case.
“The trial court cannot decide on the Toshakhana case until the final decision of the High Court,” the bench ruled.
Earlier this week, the apex court refused to entertain Khan’s plea and instructed him to await the verdict from the IHC.
“We believe that the high court can issue a better order than us. It is possible that it will give the order to stop the trial tomorrow,” he said.
