ISLAMABAD: PTI founding chairman and ex-premier Imran Khan has filed an appeal in the Supreme Court against the rejection of his bail by lower courts.
On June 24, the Lahore High Court (LHC) denied post-arrest bail to the incarcerated PTI leader in eight cases related to May 9 violence, including an attack on the house of Lahore corps commander. Mr Khan had moved the LHC after an anti-terrorism court denied bail to the former prime minister in these eight cases.
The petition, filed through senior counsel Salman Safdar on Saturday, claimed Mr Khan has been accused of conspiring and abetting violence on May 9.
However, at the time of the alleged offence, Mr Khan was in the custody of NAB. Therefore, his involvement in violence was “impossible,” the petition argued.
The appeal was filed a day after Mr Khan’s sister, Aleema, accused the Adiala jail authorities of trying to sabotage the case by confiscating documents required to submit the petition.
The fresh appeal contended the PTI founder had been subjected to an “unprecedented campaign of political victimisation” since his ouster as prime minister two years ago.
The present case is yet another attempt by the state and the police to “implicate” Mr Khan in a criminal matter, based solely on “vague and unsupported allegations of abetment”.
The prosecution has no “convincing” evidence connecting Mr Khan to the alleged occurrence, the petition claimed.
After Mr Khan’s “unlawful and invalid” arrest from the premises of the Islamabad High Court on May 9, 2023, multiple FIRs were registered in Lahore and Islamabad, the petition contended, adding none of these complaints contained any specific allegations or details regarding the purported conspiracy.
At a later stage in these cases, the prosecution introduced supplementary statements by police officials in an apparent attempt to “falsely implicate” Mr Khan.
If, as per the prosecution’s claim, the police allegedly knew about the conspiracy to orchestrate violence as early as May 7, why did they not take any action to prevent the attacks, the petition questioned.
This was “highly illogical” and further exposed the “malafide and politically motivated nature of the proceedings”.
The appeal alleged Mr Khan had been “maliciously implicated” in these cases as part of a “calculated and politically motivated design to prolong his incarceration”, harass him and tarnish his public image.
Mr Khan’s arrest was “never genuinely required” in cases pertaining to May 9 violence, the petition pleaded.
It added the police took no action to arrest Mr Khan for over five months after his bail applications were dismissed by an Anti-Terrorism Court in Lahore on Aug 11, 2023.
Despite knowing Mr Khan’s whereabouts — Adiala jail where he was confined — the police “made no meaningful attempt to effect his arrest”.
“This lack of urgency or interest on part of the investigating agency strongly supports the inference that the arrest was not necessitated by the merits of the case, but rather was a tool of oppression, thereby further justifying the grant of post-arrest bail,” the petition said.
LHC decision
The petition claimed the LHC declined Mr Khan’s request for post-arrest bail by relying on “engineered and fabricated evidence” which included “stale, discredited and delayed statements of police officials”.
The high court also failed to note the prosecution had been “consistently shifting its stance” by continually changing the case’s narrative.
“Each new version was introduced only after the preceding one failed to withstand before the courts of law, thereby rendering the prosecution’s case doubtful and entitling the petitioner to the benefit of further inquiry.”
These contradictions clearly make a case for Mr Khan to be granted bail under Section 497(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
The said section, which allows bail in non-bailable offences, states: “If it appears to such officer or Court … that there are not reasonable grounds for believing that the accused has committed [a non-bailable offence], but that there are sufficient grounds for further inquiry into his guilt, the accused shall, pending such inquiry, be released on bail…”.
Legal team denied entry
Also on Saturday, Ms Aleema, the PTI founder’s sister, claimed his legal team was not allowed inside the Adiala Jail to attend the proceedings of the Toshakhana 2 case.
While talking to reporters outside the prison, Ms Aleema said she and the lawyers were waiting but neither was allowed to enter the prison.
“We were told that only one lawyer can go inside the jail but the lawyer asked how he would [plead the case] without his legal team,” Ms Aleema said.
She claimed the jail authorities violated the judge’s orders, who “time and again said the lawyers of Imran Khan and Bushra Bibi be allowed to enter”.
Ms Aleema said no one was listening to judges “because of the 26th Constitutional Amendment ”.
She added her brother has already given a call to launch a protest campaign and raise a voice against the amendment.
