Court rejects PTI statement in November 26 case


Cites PTI chairman’s repeated failure to record statement and lack of evidence to support it

ISLANABAD:

An additional district and sessions court in Islamabad dismissed a private complaint filed by the PTI against Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif, some key ministers and police officers over allegations of murder of party workers during the November 26, 2024 protest at Islamabad D-Chowk.

Additional Sessions Judge Muhammad Afzal Majoka dismissed the complaint after PTI Chairman Advocate Gohar Ali Khan repeatedly failed to record his statement under section 200 of the CrPC.

In his 17-page order, the judge noted that the complaint had been filed on December 14, 2024, but Gohar was not present on the filing date.

“On sixteen hearing dates, the complainant’s summary statement has not been recorded. On thirteen hearing dates, adjournments were requested in favor of the complainant for the recording of his summary statement, which were granted,” the order states.

The court observed that under section 200(2) of the CrPC, adjournments can be granted subject to payment of costs not less than Rs 10,000. It noted that the court had been lenient and had not imposed costs despite the author’s repeated failure to record his statement and present preliminary evidence.

The order said that in the previous hearing the complainant had been directed to take note of his statement, failing which “the law would take its own course”.

In the last hearing, advocate Sardar Khurram Latif Khan Khosa sought another adjournment, arguing that senior advocate Sardar Muhammad Latif Khan Khosa was on a general adjournment.

The judge noted that the lawyer was asked to submit an approved application showing that the lead lawyer was on a general adjournment, but did not do so.

“No approved application for a general adjournment by senior counsel has been made before the court. No justification is available for further adjournment. Accordingly, the application for adjournment on behalf of the plaintiff is rejected,” the order said.

The court said that despite numerous opportunities, the plaintiff had not made any representation before the court and therefore it was only required to examine the contents of the complaint and the material on record.

He noted that Gohar had nowhere claimed to be an eyewitness to the alleged incident.

The order noted that in paragraph seven of the complaint, Gohar alleged that Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa Chief Minister Sohail Afridi and several provincial ministers were eyewitnesses but none of them appeared before the court to record a preliminary statement in support of the complaint.

The court further observed that the central allegation against the respondents was that they had ordered or carried out firing on PTI protesters.

Although the names of 38 injured persons were mentioned in the complaint, none of them were presented before the court for preliminary statements to be taken. Likewise, the order indicated that there were no medical-legal reports to support the accusations about the injured.

The complaint also referred to 12 people who allegedly died during the incident, but the court noted that no post-mortem reports had been filed.

The judge noted that in paragraph 13 of the complaint, the complainant had stated that he was seeking post-mortem reports, medico-legal reports and other evidence through the legal process and had undertaken to submit them to the court. However, the order noted that despite the lapse of about 19 months, no such reports had been filed.

The court noted that to substantiate such accusations it was necessary to establish that the deaths occurred due to violence attributable to a specific person. “There is no evidence that twelve people died due to unnatural death or violence,” the order says.

The judge highlighted the importance of forensic and medico-legal evidence in criminal proceedings, observing that forensic medicine plays a fundamental role in the criminal justice system and is part of the right to a fair trial guaranteed by Article 10-A of the Constitution.

He also noted that no death certificates or post-mortem reports had been attached to the complaint.

The court further observed that the complaint itself claimed that former KP chief minister Ali Amin Gandapur, former NA opposition leader Omar Ayub and former first lady Bushra Bibi were inside the bulletproof container that was allegedly attacked and then burnt.

According to the judge, the author described these people as eyewitnesses, but none of them appeared in court to take statements in support of the accusations. The order further said that no witness schedule had been submitted along with the complaint.

The court also addressed the author’s claim that the hospitals had refused to cooperate in providing post-mortem reports and had handed over the bodies after obtaining written statements from the legal heirs that the deceased had died in accidents.

The judge noted that even if this allegation were accepted for the sake of argument, the legal heirs would still be free to obtain post-mortem examinations at hospitals of their choice. He stated that even after the burial an application for exhumation could have been filed to determine the actual cause of death.

“If twelve persons had died due to violence, the complainant or others could have filed an application for exhumation of their bodies before the learned magistrate to determine the cause of death.”

He held that the plaintiff had not attached any sufficient material to justify the continuation of the case. The order noted that while photocopies of newspaper clippings in three volumes had been attached, no video or USB material containing evidence of the alleged incident had been produced.

It also noted that the complaint did not identify the journalists or other people who reported the alleged incident.

On 26 November 2024, the LEAs cracked down on PTI protesters who had gathered in Islamabad to pressure the PML-N government to release Imran Khan.

The PTI later claimed that at least a dozen of its workers had died in a brutal state crackdown. The party later filed a complaint against Chief Minister Shehbazf, Home Minister Mohsin Naqvi, Information Minister Atta Tarar, Defense Minister Khawaja Asif, Islamabad IG Syed Ali Nasir Rizvi and others.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *