What's new

Cipher case : under the Official Secrets Act

Hard to tell?

Looters, gangsters and murderers are back in power.

These cockroaches would sell the country down the drain to save their own a*ses.
why would imran khan do nothing about it when he had the chance?
 
why would imran khan do nothing about it when he had the chance?
When the results were being announced in the 2019 elections, midway they shut the feed down to fudge the votes. They were already doing massive rigging but IK still won, but not with a majority. His hands were tied.

If there was no rigging he would have had a majority in the 2013 elections and we would be looking at 10 years of solid progress by now.
 
A mass scale uprising in Pakistan against the Sindh might fix this. India can attack at the same time.

The Afghans have afghanistan. They are free to all go into Pakistan, with India on the other side.
 
.,.,.,

IHC seeks judge’s appointment record in cipher case

Malik Asad
November 21, 2023

ISLAMABAD: The Islamabad High Court on Monday sought the appointment record of the judge conducting the trial of former prime minister Imran Khan under the Official Secrets Act.

A two-judge bench comprising Justice Miangul Hassan Aurangzeb and Justice Saman Rafat Imtiaz issued the directives while hearing Mr Khan’s intra-court appeal (ICA) against the IHC’s decision to dismiss his plea for an open trial in the cipher case.

The bench also ordered IHC registrar Tahir Sabir to present the letter written by Judge Abual Hasnat Zulqarnain to the IHC administration for permission to conduct the ex-PM’s trial in jail.

During the hearing, Mr Khan’s counsel, Salman Akram Raja, claimed that the judge “virtually conducted the in-camera trial in the jail”.

Qureshi claims immunity, moves apex court for bail

Justice Aurangzeb reminded the counsel of Attorney General Mansoor Uman Awan’s assertion that the judge took the decision due to threats to Mr Khan’s life.

The court will not examine the nature of threats referred to by security agencies, but relevant provisions of the law for the appointment of Judge Zulqarnain and the decision to conduct the trial in jail.

Mr Khan’s counsel argued that security concerns should be based on material available on record.

Attorney General Awan said the government’s decision to conduct a jail trial was “an administration action” that could be challenged but not be assailed under the Law Reforms Ordinance.

The court was, however, of the view that the administrative order could come under judicial scrutiny.

When the bench asked what caused the judge to go for a jail trial, the attorney general replied that “the presiding judge has taken note of the security threat”.

Advocate Raja argued that the trial court judge’s conduct disentitled him to proceed in the cipher case. “The manner of deciding to conduct the jail trial was erroneous.”

According to him, the request to declare the jail premises a court has to be routed through the chief commissioner concerned.

Justice Aurangzeb remarked that such issues emerged since special courts are not in the administrative control of the high court.

“All these miseries will end if these courts are brought under the high court’s administration.”

Continuing with his arguments, Advocate Raja said the federal cabinet approved the jail trial on Nov 15 and applied it with retrospective effect. “[The] cabinet cannot give approval retrospectively. It could have granted consent but with prospective effect.”

He also objected to the appointment of Judge Zulqarnain as special court judge.

“The competent authority for appointing the judge is the federal government,” Justice Aurangzeb observed.

However, Mr Raja argued that the judge’s appointment required consultation with the chief justice.

He requested the court to declare the trial court proceedings illegal and also sought an order for an open court trial.

Advocate Raja requested the court to set aside the trial court proceeding as, in addition to these anomalies, the charge was also “not framed properly”, and that too in an offence carrying the death penalty.

Moreover, the cipher — key evidence in the case — and other documents were not shared with the defence counsel, he added.

The bench adjourned further hearing till Tuesday (today).

Qureshi moves SC

In a related development, PTI Vice Chairman Shah Mehmood Qureshi filed a petition in the Supreme Court against the dismissal of his bail plea in the cipher case by the IHC.

He contended that the judge “did not properly consider facts” while examining the plea.

According to Mr Qureshi, he was not nominated in the FIR and could not be booked due to immunity under Article 248 as he was the foreign minister when the alleged illegal action occurred.

In his judgement, IHC Chief Justice Aamer Farooq had said the jail trial meant in-camera proceedings, and not an open trial.
 
.,.,.,

SC seeks responses from federation, FIA on Imran’s bail plea in cipher case

Haseeb Bhatti
November 22, 2023

1700658317748.png



The Supreme Court on Wednesday issued notices to the federation and Federal Investigation Agency (FIA) and sought responses from them on PTI Chairman Imran Khan’s bail plea in the cipher case.

The cipher case pertains to a diplomatic document that the FIA’s charge sheet alleges was never returned by Imran. The PTI has long held that the document contained a threat from the United States to oust Imran as prime minister.

The former premier and his aide Shah Mahmood Qureshi, who is also behind bars, were indicted in the case on Oct 23. Both have pleaded not guilty and approached the apex court for bail.
 

Cipher case judge may be repatriated over ‘misconduct’

Malik Asad
April 24, 2024

ISLAMABAD: The administration of Islamabad High Court (IHC) has initiated the process to send back District and Sessions Judge Abul Hasnat Mohammad Zulqarnain to his parent department, the Lahore High Court (LHC), over alleged misconduct.

Judge Zulqarnain convicted former prime minister Imran Khan and PTI leader Shah Mahmood Qureshi in the cipher case and sentenced them to 10 years’ rigorous imprisonment each, in a hurriedly concluded trial.

Sources in the IHC told Dawn on Tuesday that the senior puisne judge, Justice Mohsin Akhtar Kayani, who is also the inspection judge of the capital’s Special Courts, has recommended the repatriation of Judge Zulqarnain since a division bench of the high court passed certain observations regarding the conduct of the judge in a bail order on the plea of PTI leader Aamir Masood Mughal.

Mr Mughal, who was booked in March last year for allegedly leading a group of rioters that set a police van on fire, applied for pre-arrest bail at the Anti-Terrorism Court.

During a hearing on Feb 6, Mr Mughal appeared in the court of ATC judge Zulqarnain and requested the court to adjourn the hearing on the petition until after the Feb 8 general elections, in which the accused participated as an independent candidate, backed by the PTI.

The judge accepted the request and adjourned the matter until Feb 13.

The IHC bench, however, noted that “the presiding officer [Judge Zulqarnain] dictated and announced such an order in the open court. However, later they were informed that the said petition [for pre-arrest bail] has been dismissed for non-prosecution”.

According to the order, the IHC asked the petitioner and his lawyers to submit separate affidavits before the court, and they later submitted affidavits affirming the facts.

The court further noted that the investigation officer in the case also confirmed the statements of the petitioner and his counsel that the ATC-I on Feb 6 had adjourned the hearing until Feb 13.

“At this juncture, we will exercise restraint to record observations regarding the conduct of the presiding officer [ATC-I judge] in the light of the principle and law laid down by the Supreme Court. However, a separate note is being submitted on the administrative side,” the order said.

Published in Dawn, April 24th, 2024
 

Back
Top Bottom