ISLAMABAD, Aug 23 (APP): The Supreme Court on Wednesday adjourned the hearing of an appeal filed by the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) chairman against an order of the Islamabad High Court (IHC) pertaining to the Toshakhana case till Thursday.
A three-member bench comprising Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJP) Umar Ata Bandial, Justice Mazahar Ali Akber Naqvi and Justice Jamal Khan Mandokhail heard the appeal of the PTI chief.
At the outset of hearing, CJP Bandial asked whether the top court should hear the appeal itself or highlight some points for the high court. Whether the petitioner had raised the same questions before the IHC. The high court’s bench would take up the case tomorrow in morning while the top court would hear case at 1 p.m.
The appellant argued that apparently the Secretary of Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP) was not an authority to file the criminal complaint, he added.
The CJP said whether the trial court had addressed the legal questions raised by the high court on August 4 with the directive to decide the maintainability issue within seven days. However, the trial court announced the verdict on the very next day after the IHC’s decision.
ECP’s lawyer Amjad Pervaiz said that the PTI chairman had other forums to approach for relief.
The CJP observed that the ECP was also the forum. He asked whether the lawyer (Amjad Pervaiz) wanted the apex court to issue directives for immediate release of the former prime minister, as the trial court had given the judgment in haste.
Imran Khan’s lawyer Latif Khosa Advocate argued that every member Parliament used to submit his and his family owned assets details to the CP by December 31. Six members of the Parliament had sent a reference to the National Assembly speaker against his client that he had allegedly given a false declaration about his assets.
Justice Mandokhail remarked that the sessions court was supposed to give the verdict as there was no any stay order against it. He further remarked that the ECP could take action within 120 days when it came to know about a false declaration.
Justice Mazahar Navqvi questioned that if the members Parliament were authorized to send a reference against any of their colleague.
The ECP’s Director General Law adopted the stance that the sessions court had announced its verdict on the points raised by the petitioner.
ECP’s lawyer Amjad Pervaiz said that the trial court had given an opportunity to the defence three time and then announced the verdict in absence of the accused.
Later, in the written order regarding hearing, the chief justice said that the top court had been told that an appeal was already pending with the high court and it would be heard tomorrow. The application seeking suspension of the sentence was also filed before IHC, he added.
The order said that the accused had stated in his statement of section-342 that he wanted the present the witnesses but the trial court dismissed his request stating the witnesses were irrelevant. The trial court announced its verdict on August 5, after calling the case two or three times, which was a serious legal point.
Follow the PNI Facebook page for the latest news and updates.
