The Islamabad High Court (IHC) on Tuesday declared the arrest of Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) leaders Fawad Chaudhry, Shireen Mazari and Senator Falak Naz under Section 3 of the Maintenance of Public Ordinance (MPO) "illegal". The orders to release the PTI leaders were issued by Justice Mian Gul Hassan Aurangzeb’s court while hearing separate pleas.
During Fawad Chaudhry's hearing, Islamabad Advocate General Barrister Jahangir Jadoon appeared before the single-judge bench.
“I want to place some facts before the court,” he said, informing the court that the copy of the court’s order was not given to the IG office and law officers. He added that the biometric verification of the PTI leader was also not done on the petition.
At this, the judge rebuked the lawyer saying that he wasn’t the judge and it was the court’s authority to see whether the biometrics had been done.
Moving on, the AG contended that Fawad Chaudhry had not been arrested in any case. He would have been required to be presented in court if the arrest had been made under a case.
Barrister Jadoon further argued that Fawad through his conduct had to prove whether he is a peaceful citizen or not. He added that the nation incurred losses of billions due to the incidents of May 9.
At this, Justice Aurangzeb remarked that the court had not barred the authorities from taking action on those incidents.
However, Jadoon mentioned that the court while stopping Imran Khan’s arrest had mentioned the MPO separately. If they had stopped arrest in cases only, the arrest could have been made under MPO, he added.
At this, the court asked who had advised that the arrest could be made under MPO.
To the court’s query, the AG responded that no one had advised them, however, they were unaware of the court order against arrest.
The government lawyer then presented a tweet by Fawad, posted on May 10, saying that it was a video of the PTI leader inciting workers to join the protests.
The government lawyer stated that Fawad in his tweet had said that it was liable to the PTI workers to take part in protests following Imran Khan's arrest.
On this point, Babar Awan argued that the deputy commissioner must have known about the high court’s order on the arrest by now. He urged the court to extend its order stopping authorities from arresting Fawad and his client be given time to contact the relevant court.
The court then asked if the police had shown any documents to the PTI leader at the time of his arrest.
“When the order was read, the police officer said he did not know English," said Awan. He added that his client was arrested based on material that does not exist.
To this assertion by the PTI lawyer, Justice Aurangzeb responded that the incidents that occurred after Imran Khan’s arrest should be taken seriously.
“Fawad Chaudhry is an important person, a former federal minister, does he not know the mob of Pakistan?” asked Justice Aurangzeb.
“When Fawad asked people to come out did he expect only law-abiding citizens to come out?”
“If the district magistrate does not pass this [detention] order on the matter then what should be done?” asked Justice Aurangzeb. He further added that the court had summoned Fawad so that he could be released.
“It had not seen the material shared by the advocate general today.”
IHC orders immediate release of PTI's Shireen Mazari
The Islamabad High Court (IHC) on Tuesday termed Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) leaders Shireen Mazari and Senator Falak Naz’s detention as ‘unlawful’ and ordered authorities concerned to release them immediately.
Mazari was apprehended at her residence during a pre-dawn raid in Islamabad under section 3 of Maintenance of Public Order (MPO).
Her arrest comes after a series of arrests of several other PTI leaders,Asad Umar, Fawad Chaudhry, Shah Mehmood Qureshi, Ali Mohammad Khan, and Senator Ejaz Chaudhry following three-day mayhem in several cities of the country after the arrest of deposed premier Imran Khan in Al Qadir Trust case.
IHC Justice Mian Gul Hasan Aurangzeb heard the plea filed by PTI leaders’ councils and after hearing arguments he issued the aforementioned verdict.
