ISLAMABAD: The Additional District and Sessions Judge, on Wednesday, approved the review petition of the police seeking the physical remand of Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) leader and party chairman Imran Khan’s chief of staff, Dr Shahbaz Gill in a sedition case and remanded the accused for two days into police custody.
The ADSJ Zeba Chaudhry while announcing the reserved judgment, said the accused Gill is given in the custody of the investigation officer (IO) for the purpose of investigation for 48 hours. The court also directed the IO to get the accused medically examined immediately after taking his custody and submit a report of medical examination before the court.
The court also issued orders to the superintendent jail to hand over Gill’s custody to the Islamabad police.
Earlier, the court after hearing arguments of the prosecution and the defense reserved its verdict on a review plea seeking the physical remand of Shahbaz Gill.
The Islamabad High Court (IHC), on August 16, directed the local court to rehear a review petition seeking the physical remand of Gill.
At the start of the hearing, Special prosecutor Raja Rizwan Abbasi read out the title of the case before the court. The judicial magistrate remanded Gill into police custody for only two days but the investigation officer (IO) requested an extension in the remand, he said.
He said that the IO did not say that the investigation was completed and he need further remand. There should be a concrete reason for rejecting the request of the IO by the judicial magistrate, he said, adding that the judicial magistrate had rejected the IO’s request merely on the basis of assumption. The accused tried to create mutiny in an institution, he said.
To this, Gill’s lawyer Faisal Chaudhry said the word “alleged” should be used with the allegation of mutiny. The prosecutor said that he would have not supported an extension in the physical remand of the accused if the IO stated that he wanted to obtain the mobile data of the accused.
“Here the accusation against Gill is about the words that he said”, the prosecutor said.
Abbasi said that physical remand is mandatory for the investigation of the accused in different aspects. He said that the duty magistrate should have considered all aspects of the matter but he rejected the request.
“How did the magistrate consider Gill's statement for the final statement?” he asked, adding that as per Qanun-e-Shahadat it is not correct.
He further argued that a remand of at least 10 days is granted in ordinary cases while this is a case of criminal conspiracy. The PTI leader is telling lies again and again and, therefore, further interrogation and a polygraph test are mandatory, he said.
The prosecutor said that the judicial magistrate had written in its order that the accused stated that his mobile phone was with his driver. The IO clearly wrote in the plea that it is not just about the recovery of a cell phone but there are other aspects that need to be investigated, he said. The order passed by the judicial magistrate on August 12 was unconstitutional, he said.
He requested the court to approve the police’s request regarding the extension of the physical remand of Gill.
Gill’s counsel Salman Safdar said the case against Gill is based on mala fide intent and political revenge because he mentioned the names of nine Pakistan Muslim League (PML-N) leaders including Maryam Nawaz, AyazSadiq, and others. This is a false case and starts an argument over his client’s post-arrest bail petition, he said, adding that the prosecution has nothing for presenting its argument regarding Gill’s bail application.
He complained that some of the aspects of the remand have been kept secret and the case record has not been provided to the defense. He requested the court to provide case record to the defense. It needs to be ascertained why the police want Gill’s remand, he said.
Gill’s counsel further said that no one moves without a mobile phone. It was observed in the CCTV footage that Gill had put his mobile in his pocket at the time of arrest, he said, adding that when Gill’s mobile is in the custody of police then why are they demanding a mobile phone?
He said that the case has been based on the selection of words and speech and the police have the speech, he said.
Safdar said that a treason case could not be filed without the approval of the government.
“I request the court to ask the prosecution whether it had obtained the consent of the federal cabinet before filing the case”, he said.
The defense counsel raised objection over the admissibility of the case, saying that the complainant is a magistrate who filed the case but he is not present in the court.
“Gill made some wrong statements, things could be wrong but they do not come under treason or criminal conspiracy”, he said.
Gill had been remanded for two and the request was not turned down immediately. He said that the IO failed to complete the investigation in three days, while the forensic department had sent the reports within 24 hours.
He said that an accused who has been sent to judicial remand cannot be sent back to physical remand. If the physical remand of Gill is again granted it will affect the case, he said.
The defense further argued that torture of private parts is not acceptable. They want to remand Gill to further torture him, he said. The order passed by the judicial magistrate on August 12 is legal, there is nothing illegal in it, he said.
The prosecutor said that police conducted Gill’s medical again twice but no evidence of torture was found.
The court after hearing arguments of both the parties reserved its verdict till 3:00 pm. Meanwhile, Gill’s counsel challenged an extension of Gill’s physical remand in the IHC.
Copyright Business Recorder, 2022
Comments
Comments are closed.