SC postponed the Imran bail supplications audience


Listen to the article

The Supreme Court postponed on Monday the Appeals Hearing filed by former Prime Minister Imran Khan until August 12.

The founder of PTI had approached the Apex court after the dismissal of his bail requests in cases of May 9 disturbances by the Superior Court of Lahore (LHC).

The postponement followed a request from the Legal Representative of Salman Safdar, Salman Akram Raja, who asked the bank to reschedule the audience for next week and issue notices accordingly.

The case was taken by a two -members bank led by the president of the Supreme Court Yahya Afridi.

However, the bank rejected the request to advance in the hearing, choosing to defer the procedures for almost two weeks. Bail requests are now scheduled to be heard on August 12.

The LHC, led by Judge Shahbaz Ali Rizvi, had previously rejected Imran’s bond, citing his alleged participation in the planning of attacks in military facilities in advance of his arrest on May 9, 2023.

Imran appealed to the Supreme Court on July 26, arguing that the Prosecutor’s Office had presented three conflicting narratives that link him with the alleged conspiracy, all of which were rejected by several courts.

The first version involved two police officers, Hassam Afzal and Asmat Kamal, who, according to the reports, heard the conspiracy on May 7 and 4, respectively.

This claim was dismissed by the ATC-III Lahore due to late dissemination and insufficient evidence, which led to bond in FIRS 366/23 and 1078/23.

The second version alleged incitement through media statements, but failed due to the lack of incriminating material and was rejected by the LHC.

The third version was based on new witness statements, including the leaders of PTI Sadaqat Abbasi and Wasiq Qayyum, but it was also incredulous for ATC-I Rawalpindi, which unloaded Bushra Imran on August 20, 2024.

Despite the rejection of the three versions of the competent courts, the LHC denied Imran’s bond on June 24, based solely on statements by the two police.

Imran’s request argues that the case qualifies as one of the additional investigation, which entitles the bail after arrest under section 497 (2) CRPC 1898.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published.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