ISLAMABAD:The Islamabad High Court (IHC) on Monday reserved its judgment on a petition challenging the decision of a lower court for granting further two-day physical remand of PTI leader Shahbaz Gill to police.
Acting Chief Justice Aamer Farooq heard the case against the accused’s remand in a sedition case registered by the Kohsar Police Station. Advocate General Islamabad Jahangir Jadoon, Inspector General of Police (IGP) Dr Akber Nasir Khan and the Central Jail Adiala administration officials appeared before the court.
At the outset of hearing, Advocate General Jadoon requested the court to take notice of threatening statement of Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) Chairman Imran Khan against the woman additional sessions judge.
Shahbaz Gill’s counsel Shoaib Shaheen informed the court that a case had already been registered against Imran Khan due to the said statement under the Anti-Terrorism Act and the law would take its own course.
Justice Farooq remarked that Imran Khan’s statement had no connection with the instant case.
The investigation officer told the court that accused Shahbaz Gill had given a controversial statement on news channel through a landline number from the residence of PTI chairman in Banigala.
He claimed that the accused had read the transcript of statement from his mobile phone, and the police had to recover the said device. The police also wanted to have polygraph test of the accused.
Special prosecutor Rizwan Abbasi adopted the stance that the police diaries could not be shared with the defence lawyers, and the the court could only go through them. The defence lawyers could damage the evidence if they were given access to the diaries, he added.
Rizwan Abbasi said 90 per cent of the investigation was yet to be conducted.
Addressing Gill’s lawyer, the court said it was not the sole case of remand as it would hear a number of such cases later. The court would have to ensure that no such precedent was set that might freeze the judicial system in future.
Gill’s counsel Suleman Safdar claimed that his client had been tortured. Torturing accused (during investigation) was a routine matter in the country, and the court should take notice on it, he pleaded.
The lawyer also read out the contents of medical report of Shahbaz Gill. He claimed that the medical board had stated that there were some signs on the body of his client. He urged the court to summon the doctors and ask them in that regard.
He questioned why the police required more physical remand of his client as his mobile phone was already in their possession. First time in the country’s history any accused was given to the police custody again after being sent to jail on judicial remand, he said and prayed the court to set aside the decision of judicial magistrate for a two-day more physical remand of Shahbaz Gill.
After listening arguments, the court reserved its judgment in the case.