The Islamabad district and sessions court has declared the Toshakhana criminal case against PTI Chairman maintainable.
The former premier’s request to declare the case non-maintainable was turned down. The verdict was announced by Additional District and Sessions Judge Humayun Dilawar Khan.
The court also terminated the right of hearing of the PTI chairman’s lawyer. The lawyer’s request for more time was also rejected.
The sessions court is likely to announce its decision in a short while. The court reserved the decision without hearing the PTI chairman’s counsel.
“Khawaja Haris is busy, he cannot come today. We need time till Monday,” Barrister Gohar Ali Khan pleaded. The court rejected the plea.
Earlier, the district and sessions judge expressed annoyance over the non-appearance of both PTI Chairman Imran Khan and his counsel Khawaja Haris on the hearing of the Toshakhana criminal case.
The judge remarked that in the last three days, counsel Khawaja Haris did not appear even once, adding that the defence side submitted an undertaking that the lawyer would appear.
“What happened to repeated commitments?” the judge asked. The judge also questioned if only the suspects had rights, and not the petitioner.
“Your attitude towards the court is not appropriate,” the judge commented, asking the lawyer to mention any one hearing in which PTI Chairman Imran Khan appeared in court.
The former premier’s lawyer Gohar Ali Khan told the court that the government itself said his client had threats at the district courts.
“The court is being very lenient towards you in the Toshakhana case,” the judge remarked, adding such an example of leniency cannot be found anywhere.
Earlier, the PTI chairman filed an application for exemption from appearance. The election commission’s lawyer objected to the application.
The PTI chairman’s lawyer Gohar Ali Khan also filed an application for adjourning the proceedings today, adding his client had security threats at the district courts.
The election commission’s lawyer pointed out that the question is whether the district and sessions court has the authority to hear the present case.
Amjad Parvez said the complainant said on oath that the complaint was filed at the direction of the commission.
If an application has to be filed with the election commissioner it won’t be done by the chief election commissioner, adding he will nominate an officer for the purpose.
The commission’s lawyer said the ECP is following the Toshakhana case considering its constitutional obligations. It is the commission’s constitutional responsibility to take action against corrupt actions.
Whether the crime will be proved or not will be decided after the trial, he added.
