Verdict on PTI chief’s plea challenging Toshakhana sentence tomorrow

ISLAMABAD: The Islamabad High Court (IHC) will announce its verdict on a plea of the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) chief against his conviction by a trial court in the Toshakhana case.

The two-member IHC bench headed by Chief Justice Justice Aamer Farooq and consisting of Justice Tariq Mahmood Jahangiri will announce the verdict on Tuesday at 11am.

The appeal against the sentence in the Toshakhana case was heard by a division bench of the IHC and the decision was reserved after hearing the arguments of the PTI chief’s counsel and the election commission’s lawyer.

IHC Chief Justice Justice Aamer Farooq remarked that he hoped that the decision on the sentence suspension appeal will be made today.

When the hearing commenced, Barrister Ali Zafar said that we have filed a request for a meeting with the PTI chief, kindly listen to it. The IHC chief justice made remarks saying, “I have said that the decision on the sentence suspension appeal will be made today, so keep your hopes high.”

The lawyer of the Election Commission, Amjad Pervez, said that the court has already declared its mind. Now, there is no need for going into argument. To which, the chief justice explained, “I have said that the decision on the sentence suspension appeal will be made today.”

The lawyer said that without giving notice to the state, the case cannot be decided. Amjad Pervez said that “we are not opposing the appeal for suspension of the sentence based on the short-term sentence; we are only saying that decision cannot be taken without a notice to the government”.

According to Amjad Pervez, the law also states that the government must be served notice.

Chief Justice remarked, “This is the Election Commission’s private complaint against the PTI chief; there is no mention of the state in the trial court. Why is it necessary to form a party here? In NAB cases, the complainant is never made a party.”

IHC adjourns hearing on plea challenging Toshakhana jail sentence until Monday

The lawyer explained that the law of NAB states the definition of prosecutor, “NAB cases do not involve the state, NAB has its own prosecutor who is heard, it cannot be that NAB is heard without an order.”

Chief Justice Aamer Farooq said that the NAB’s reference does not include public prosecutor. Amjad Pervez said that NAB has its own prosecutor who is heard; the law of NAB gives the right to the public prosecutor.

“In a high treason case, the state must be given notice; the law does not even have the term complainant; it mentions the state.”

Their point was that even the appellant did not raise the objection that the trial court does not have the authority to hear the case, they say that the trial court has to do it, but the complaint has to go to the magistrate first.

Lawyer Amjad Pervez referred to the Indian court’s relevant decision, saying that Rahul Gandhi was sentenced to two years in a private complaint, and the appeal for the suspension of the sentence was filed, which was rejected by the magistrate.

The lawyer’s point was that the court has determined that suspending the sentence is not a hard and fast rule.