IHC stays trial court proceedings against Imran in cipher case

IHC stays trial court proceedings against Imran in cipher case

The Islamabad High Court on Tuesday halted proceedings against PTI Chairman Imran Khan in the cipher case, stressing the need for the court to be informed about the “circumstances” that prompted the trial to be conducted in jail.

The IHC division bench, comprising Justice Mian­gul Hassan Aur­angzeb and Justice Saman Rafat Imtiaz, announced the verdict while hearing the former prime minister’s intra-court appeal against a single-member bench’s decision that had approved Imran’s jail trial.

The cipher case pertains to a diplomatic document that the Federal Investigation Agency’s charge sheet alleges was never returned by Imran. The PTI has long held that the document contained a threat from the United States to oust Imran as prime minister.

The former premier and his aide Shah Mahmood Qureshi, who is also behind bars, were indicted in the case on Oct 23. They have pleaded not guilty.

The IHC has endorsed Imran’s indictment, disposing of his plea against the same, but had also instructed the special court judge to ensure a “fair trial”.

At the commencement of the hearing today, PTI chief Imran Khan’s lawyer, Salman Akram Raja, and the Attorney General Mansoor Awan were present in the court.

Justice Aurangzeb clarified that allowing certain family members of the petitioner did not make it into an open court hearing.

The attorney general informed the court that the federal cabinet had approved the proceedings in the cipher case at the trial court, and a copy of the relevant notification would be presented.

Justice Aurangzeb expressed that the court will scrutinise the notification, questioning the “extraordinary circumstances” that led to the trial being conducted in its current manner. “We want to know the actual events; you have to inform us,” the judge remarked.

Furthermore, the court sought clarification on the reasons behind the federal cabinet’s approval of the jail trial. “The most important question lies in determining the status of court proceedings preceding the cabinet’s approval,” Justice Aurangzeb asked.

The judge also referred to the former Indian prime minister Indira Gandhi’s jail trial, saying “it was conducted at Tihar Jail where media was not allowed. Similar to that scenario involving a former premier, this case also involves the ex-PM.”

After the arguments, the court sought a reply from the attorney general and adjourned the hearing.

In the previous hearing, the special court had recorded the statements of three prosecution witnesses in the cipher case.

Al-Qadir Trust case against former prime minister Imran Khan.

The PTI chairman was first arrested in the Al-Qadir Trust case on May 9, which led to violent protests countrywide. He was released two days later after the Supreme Court deemed his arrest unlawful.

In August, the PTI chief was jailed after he was convicted in the Toshakhana case. Although his sentence was suspended on Aug 29, Imran remained in jail because he was on judicial remand in the cipher case.

While Imran is already imprisoned in Adiala Jail in the cipher case, he was also put under arrest yesterday by the NAB in the Al-Qadir Trust case and the Toshakhana reference.

Today, Judge Mohammad Bashir presided over the hearing. At the outset of the proceedings, he asked the NAB prosecutor when he planned to present the former premier before the court.

He also inquired whether Imran was still in jail or had been shifted to NAB’s office, to which the prosecutor answered that it was not in his knowledge.

Judge Bashir then ordered the prosecutor to inquire about the matter and also if there had been a notification issued regarding the jail trial of the former prime minister.

When reporters, who were in the courtroom inquired about the case, the judge replied that only NAB could tell where the PTI chairman would be presented. When asked about the jail trial, the judge observed that if a notification for the same had been issued, the hearing would be held in Adiala jail.

Judge Bashir also asked if the reporters would go to the jail for coverage, to which they replied that they were not allowed to enter the jail for reporting.

At this, the judge remarked, “There should be permission. This is why open courts exist. If there is a jail trial, then we will also do something about you all. Can’t we give [reporters] any [entry] pass, etc?”

The reporters agreed they should be given access to cover trial proceedings while the judge noted, “This is the benefit of an open court that whatever the witness is saying, everyone can hear for themselves.”

More to follow

Scroll to Top