FIA asks IHC to remand cipher case back to trial court if trial was not fair

ISLAMABAD: The Federal Investigation Agency (FIA) prosecutor asked the Islamabad High Court (IHC) to remand back the cipher case to the trial court if it deems that trial of the case was not fair.

A division bench comprising Chief Justice Aamer Farooq and Justice Miangul Hassan Aurangzeb heard the appeals of Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) founder Imran Khan and Vice-Chairman Shah Mahmood Qureshi against their convictions in the cipher case.

At the onset of the hearing, FIA prosecutor Zulfiqar Abbas Naqvi informed the bench that his colleague prosecutor Hamid Ali Shah was shifting his ailing mother to Islamabad; therefore, he cannot appear in the court. He added that he himself would continue the arguments in the case.

During the hearing, the affidavits of both of the state counsels who represented Imran before the trial court were submitted to the court. Then, the bench summoned both the counsels to the rostrum.

The CJ asked whether both the state counsels have ever conducted trial of death penalty case earlier. Advocate General Islamabad replied that not as a state counsel but as lawyers.

Naqvi said that two points are currently pending before the court and one is the lack of transparency of the trial, while the other is the merits of the case. He further said that if the court declares that the trial was not transparent, the outcome will be different.

Justice Aamer said that the point of non-transparency of the trial was raised by Imran Khan and Shah Mahmood Qureshi’s lawyers and the prosecution never said that the trial was not fair. He also said that the court had asked prosecutor Hamid Ali Shah whether the cipher case trial was fair, and he had replied that the trial was fair. Naqvi said that it would not be correct to say at this stage that the trial was not transparent.

The prosecutor told the bench that in the first phase, nine hearings were held, out of which, seven hearings were postponed while in the second phase, adjournments were sought 19 times.

He asserted that delaying tactics were repeatedly used by the accused in the cipher case. He added that the statements of the witnesses were recorded but the cross-examination could not be done.

The IHC chief justice asked that can trial court conduct the proceedings after court hours. He further asked what would be the effect if the trial court conducted the proceedings after court hours.

He further asked that if the court proceedings were held in Adiala Jail, what will be the case of the court hours on the jail hearing.

Justice Aamer remarked that are you saying that the trial was not fair and the case should be remanded? The prosecutor replied, yes, that is what he is saying. He asserted that lawyers for the accused filed frivolous pleas in the trial court.

The IHC CJ said that you are saying that the lawyers of the accused were delaying and there was no option but to appoint a public prosecutor? He added now at this stage, how can we send the case back to the trial court without looking at the merits?

Justice Miangul Hassan asked why there was so much haste in the trial. He added that there was a death penalty in the case and it was completed in three weeks. Naqvi replied that it was the direction of the High Court, so the case was completed quickly.

The PTI counsel Salman Safdar said that the statement of any new witness cannot be recorded after court hours are over and if the statement of a witness is being recorded, it is completed even after the end of court time.

The prosecutor stated that if the court comes to the conclusion that there was no fair trial, the case would be remanded back to the trial court.

Justice Aamer asked what will happen if there is no case of prosecution.

Justice Aamer remarked that you are saying that if the trial is not transparent, the High Court cannot go on the merits?

Justice Miangul Hassan asked that you are saying that if the trial is not transparent, it is necessary to remand back the case and also asked the counsel to present court precedence in this connection.

Later, the bench deferred the hearing of the case till May 27 at the request of the FIA prosecutor.

Copyright Business Recorder, 2024