The Anti-Terrorism Court of Lahore gave a reserved verdict on the bail applications of Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) founder chairman Imran Khan in 8 cases on May 9.
The anti-terrorism court in Lahore rejected the bails of Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) founder in the Jinnah House attack and May 9 eight cases. Judge Manzar Ali Gul gave a reserved verdict on the bails.
Anti-Terrorism Court Judge Manzar Ali Gul heard former Prime Minister Imran Khan’s bail pleas in 8 cases on May 9. Founding Chairman PTI’s lawyer Barrister Salman Safdar appeared in the court.
Founder PTI filed bails in Jinnah House attack, Shadman police station arson cases and in Rahat Bakery Chowk and Zaman Park burning of police vehicles. Apart from this, the founding PTI also filed bails in the Askari Tower attack and three other May 9 cases, which were rejected by the court.
Report of the hearing
Barrister Salman Safdar while arguing in the court said that the wrong reaction to the opinion of PTI founder came from the people. I have represented founder PTI in more than 240 cases. All kinds of cases were registered against one accused. There is no section under which a case has not been registered. Cypher’s case went to the Supreme Court, all others got relief from subordinate courts.
The lawyer said that in 30 cases decisions have been made against the government. I am placing before you about 25 decisions. The plaintiffs in each case are policemen. The government has thrown googly, leg break, off break second third. Sometimes they say that the conspiracy took place in this way, then they say that it did not take place in this way. Bushra Bibi was included in 12 cases that she was also involved in the conspiracy. It is easy to accuse and difficult to prove.
Barrister Salman Safdar said that I am not asking you for discharge or dismissal of the case. You cannot even provide these facilities. The accused has been in prison for a long time, I am asking the court for bail.
The lawyer argued that Pervez Musharraf’s medical records were presented, he had to leave the world to prove them true. After that everyone was convinced that all the medicals were correct. Judges have relayed PTI founder’s detention in NAB custody from May 9 to 12.
Later, Special Prosecutor Rao Abdul Jabbar said in his arguments that all the cases are of rebellion against the government and attack on sensitive installations. The judgments presented are not related to these cases. According to British law, the King is not impeachable. The accused is not a king. At the behest of the accused, 200 installations were attacked. It was said on social media that today is the day of real jihad. Indian TV channels also continued to run the same news.
The prosecutor added in the arguments that the general public is prohibited from visiting certain places in Kent. Everyone has a modern device that communicates location and messages. How PC Hotel, Awari Hotel or milk shop in Anarkali was not attacked. Military installations were attacked. The statue of Colonel Sher Khan Shaheed, who sacrificed his life for the safety of the country, was kicked. These wars and attacks continue even today. The ranger and the policeman were martyred, while the accused says that I am in jail.
While giving arguments in the court on behalf of the prosecution, it was further said that the accused was not in jail on May 7 when the conspiracy took place, the application of the accused should be dismissed.
Later, the court reserved its judgment after completing the arguments on the bail pleas of the prosecution and the accused’s counsel.
#Major #verdict #Imran #Khans #bail #pleas #cases #Pakistan
What legal strategies might Imran Khan’s team employ in response to the court’s rejection of his bail pleas?
## Interview with Legal Expert on Imran Khan’s Bail Cases
**Host:** Joining us today is legal expert, [Guest Name], to discuss the recent developments in the bail applications of former Prime Minister Imran Khan.
Mr./Ms. [Guest Name], the Anti-Terrorism Court of Lahore has given a reserved verdict on eight cases against Imran Khan, rejecting his bail pleas in the Jinnah House attack and other May 9th cases. What are the key takeaways from this hearing?
**Guest:** This is a significant development in the ongoing legal battles surrounding Imran Khan. As reported by the [search result link], the court rejected his bail applications in several key cases related to the May 9th protests, including the attack on Jinnah House. This indicates the seriousness with which the court views these charges and suggests that Khan’s legal troubles are far from over.
**Host:** Khan’s lawyer, Barrister Salman Safdar, argued that the reaction to Khan’s opinions sparked the unrest and highlighted the numerous cases filed against his client. How do you think these arguments will play out in future proceedings?
**Guest:** Safdar’s strategy aims to portray Khan as a victim of political persecution, highlighting the sheer number of cases filed against him and suggesting the government is resorting to legal tactics to silence him. While this could resonate with some supporters, it remains to be seen if the courts will be persuaded by these arguments.
**Host:** The court also heard arguments regarding the accusations leveled against Bushra Bibi, Khan’s wife, who was named in twelve cases. What implications does this have for the case moving forward?
**Guest:** The inclusion of Bushra Bibi indicates that the authorities are widening their investigation into the events of May 9th and are alleging a deeper conspiracy within Khan’s inner circle. This adds another layer of complexity to the case and could potentially lead to further charges against Khan and those close to him.
**Host:** Looking ahead, what are the potential scenarios for Imran Khan and his legal team?
**Guest:** There are several possible scenarios. Khan’s legal team could challenge the court’s decision and pursue appeals. They could also attempt to negotiate a plea bargain with the government. Ultimately, the future of these cases depends on the strength of the evidence presented, the arguments put forth by both sides, and the court’s interpretation of the law.
**Host:** Thank you for providing your insights, [Guest Name]. This is a complex and evolving situation, and we’ll continue to follow these developments closely.
