What's new

Featured Karachi court dismisses slogans case against Maryam Nawaz, Safdar Awan

Norwegian

ELITE MEMBER
Aug 19, 2014
12,273
9
18,819
Country
Pakistan
Location
Norway
Karachi court dismisses slogans case against Maryam Nawaz, Safdar Awan

maryam-nawaz-captain-safdar-2.jpg


A Karachi court dismissed the case over shouting slogans at Quaid-e-Azam’s mausoleum against PML-N’s Maryam Nawaz and her husband Safdar Awan on Wednesday.

The police had declared the case baseless.

According to the investigative officer, CCTV footage obtained by the police showed that the person who had filed the complaint was not present at the mausoleum when the PML-N leaders visited it last month.


The case was filed by Pakistan Tehreek-i-Insaf worker Waqas Ahmed Khan.

Maryam and her husband had visited Quaid’s mausoleum on October 18 before attending the Pakistan Democratic Movement rally in Karachi. A video circulating on social media showed Safdar chanting ‘vote ko izzat do’ while standing next to Pakistan’s founding father’s tomb.

The next day, Safdar was arrested and taken to the Aziz Bhatti police station.

An FIR was registered against him under sections 6 (prohibition on meetings), 8 (sanctity of the mazaar) and 10 (penalty) of the Quaid-e-Azam Mazaar Protection and Maintenance Ordinance, 1971 and Sections 506-B (criminal intimidation), 427 (mischief causing damage of Rs50) and 34 (common intention) of the Pakistan Penal Code.

Safdar was presented before a civil judge on October 19 who approved his bail. He was ordered to submit Rs0.1 million in surety bonds.


Court is dismissed on technical grounds. Pakistani justice system for you.
@Zarvan @Zibago @Indus Pakistan @Imran Khan @WebMaster
 

muhammadhafeezmalik

FULL MEMBER
Jan 21, 2015
415
-6
288
Country
Pakistan
Location
Pakistan
Waqas Ahmed Khan, who was nephew of PTI MPA Haleem Adil Sheikh, lied to the police that Capt. (r) Safdar tried to kill him at Mazar e Qaid (Sections 506-B (criminal intimidation), 427 (mischief causing damage of Rs50) and 34 (common intention) of the Pakistan Penal Code) , while police investigations proved that he was not present at the spot.
 

graphican

ELITE MEMBER
Jul 21, 2009
11,650
42
18,619
Country
Pakistan
Location
Australia
Apparently, Nani and Safdar were hosts of "Sindh Province" and they didn't want to prosecute their "guests". With this definition, they could've done any crime and got away with it.
 
Last edited:

Norwegian

ELITE MEMBER
Aug 19, 2014
12,273
9
18,819
Country
Pakistan
Location
Norway
Waqas Ahmed Khan, who was nephew of PTI MPA Haleem Adil Sheikh, lied to the police that Capt. (r) Safdar tried to kill him at Mazar e Qaid (Sections 506-B (criminal intimidation), 427 (mischief causing damage of Rs50) and 34 (common intention) of the Pakistan Penal Code) , while police investigations proved that he was not present at the spot.
But Captain Safdar was present at the tomb and made political slogans that were caught on video. Why didn't court act on this evidence? Why is it relying on Waqas Khan?
 

baqai

FULL MEMBER
Sep 28, 2006
1,669
1
2,157
Country
Pakistan
Location
Pakistan
But Captain Safdar was present at the tomb and made political slogans that were caught on video. Why didn't court act on this evidence? Why is it relying on Waqas Khan?
because they were STUPID to include those charges and in court of law it becomes case made on lies and gives defendants benefit of a doubt, like i said previously in a different thread that these incapable stupid idiots can screw even an open and shut case like this because of their impatience and stupidity.
 

muhammadhafeezmalik

FULL MEMBER
Jan 21, 2015
415
-6
288
Country
Pakistan
Location
Pakistan
But Captain Safdar was present at the tomb and made political slogans that were caught on video. Why didn't court act on this evidence? Why is it relying on Waqas Khan?

Courts rely on evidence provided by prosecutor and claimant. Claimant did not show up after registering the case. Furthermore SC lay down a strict criteria for submitting a video or audio evidence in Judge Arshad Malik Case:

A three-judge bench, headed by Chief justice of Pakistan Asif Saeed Khosa and comprising by Justice Sheikh Azmat Saeed and Justice Umar Ata Bandial, in its 25-page verdict laid down the criteria to explain as to how a video would be considered as genuine and how this evidence could be proved before a court of law.

The chief justice while authoring the verdict framed five questions in the order.

It also held that the standard of proof required in a criminal case was beyond reasonable doubt and any realistic doubt about an audio tape or video not being genuine might destroy its credibility and reliability.

About the question to determine the video as a genuine piece of evidence, the apex court stated that with the advancement of science and technology it was now possible to get a forensic examination, audit or test conducted through an appropriate laboratory so as to get it ascertained whether an audio tape or a video was genuine and such examination, audit or test could also reasonably establish if such an audio tape or video had been edited, doctored or tampered with.

Laying down requirements, the court noted that no audio tape or video could be relied upon by a court until the same was proved to be genuine and not tampered with or doctored.


A forensic report prepared by an analyst of the Punjab Forensic Science Agency in respect of an audio tape or video was per se admissible in evidence in view of the provisions of Section 9(3) of the Punjab Forensic Science Agency Act, 2007.

It said under Article 164 of the Qanun-e-Shahadat Order, 1984, it laid at the discretion of a court to allow any evidence becoming available through an audio tape or video to be produced.

Even where a court allowed an audio tape or video to be produced as evidence, such audio tape or video had to be proved in accordance with the law of evidence.

"Accuracy of the recording must be proved and satisfactory evidence, direct or circumstantial, has to be produced so as to rule out any possibility of tampering with the record."

It stated that an audio tape or video sought to be produced as evidence should be the actual record of the conversation like as and when it was made or of the event as and when it took place.


The court noted that the person recording the conversation or event had to be produced. The person recording the conversation or event must produce the audio tape or video himself.

The audio tape or video must be played in the court. An audio tape or video produced before a court as evidence ought to be clearly audible or viewable. The person recording the conversation or event must identify the voice of the person speaking or the person seen or the voice or person seen might be identified by any other person who recognised the voice or person.

It stated that any other person present at the time of making of the conversation or taking place of the event might also testify in support of the conversation heard in the audio tape or the event shown in the video.

The voices recorded or the persons shown must be properly identified.

The evidence sought to be produced through an audio tape or video had to be relevant to the controversy and otherwise admissible.

Safe custody of the audio tape or video after its preparation till production before the court must be proved.

"The transcript of the audio tape or video must have been prepared under independent supervision and control. The person recording an audio tape or video may be a person whose part of routine duties is recording of an audio tape or video and he should not be a person who has recorded the audio tape or video for the purpose of laying a trap to procure evidence. The source of an audio tape or video becoming available has to be disclosed," it added.


The court stated that the date of acquiring the audio tape or video by the person producing it before the court ought to be disclosed by such person.

An audio tape or video produced at a late stage of a judicial proceeding might be looked upon with suspicion. A formal application had to be filed before the court by the person desiring an audio tape or video to be brought on the record of the case as evidence.

 

Ladyuk

FULL MEMBER
May 20, 2020
173
0
312
Country
United Kingdom
Location
United Kingdom
Karachi court dismisses slogans case against Maryam Nawaz, Safdar Awan

View attachment 689269

A Karachi court dismissed the case over shouting slogans at Quaid-e-Azam’s mausoleum against PML-N’s Maryam Nawaz and her husband Safdar Awan on Wednesday.

The police had declared the case baseless.

According to the investigative officer, CCTV footage obtained by the police showed that the person who had filed the complaint was not present at the mausoleum when the PML-N leaders visited it last month.


The case was filed by Pakistan Tehreek-i-Insaf worker Waqas Ahmed Khan.

Maryam and her husband had visited Quaid’s mausoleum on October 18 before attending the Pakistan Democratic Movement rally in Karachi. A video circulating on social media showed Safdar chanting ‘vote ko izzat do’ while standing next to Pakistan’s founding father’s tomb.

The next day, Safdar was arrested and taken to the Aziz Bhatti police station.

An FIR was registered against him under sections 6 (prohibition on meetings), 8 (sanctity of the mazaar) and 10 (penalty) of the Quaid-e-Azam Mazaar Protection and Maintenance Ordinance, 1971 and Sections 506-B (criminal intimidation), 427 (mischief causing damage of Rs50) and 34 (common intention) of the Pakistan Penal Code.

Safdar was presented before a civil judge on October 19 who approved his bail. He was ordered to submit Rs0.1 million in surety bonds.


Court is dismissed on technical grounds. Pakistani justice system for you.
@Zarvan @Zibago @Indus Pakistan @Imran Khan @WebMaster
Not shocking pretty much all judges, police commissioner's and entire media houses are on the pay role of corrupt people like nawaz sharif wani and zardari and have been for a long time hence you're unlikely to get any justice in any court any where in pakistan.

That's why the military needed military courts to try terrorist because paid for and brought corrupt judges would not hold them to account. Same reason class A criminals and traitors like nawaz sharif wani and co walk free from court after looting the entire country.
 

AZADPAKISTAN2009

ELITE MEMBER
Sep 8, 2009
32,037
63
33,174
Country
Pakistan
Location
China
Pakistani Yo Yo Courts

  • When you submit video evidence of crime , they claim , we can't trust video evidence
  • When you submit Vodka Bottle found from Politician Room , court claims it is Orange Ka Juice
  • When you submit a bag full of money and bags full of undocumented Gold found from a Political Criminal , it is claimed that money from inheritance
  • When you claim someone has stolen land from you , court favors the politicians
  • When Politician Kills someone after hiring a Assasin , when that Assasin is caught he travels to UAE and escapes the ECL list at airport
  • When a Politician's son kills a Poor guy's kid in University or College , the Killer is called political Victim
  • When a Lady approaches court about illegal void marriage to Politician and denial of wealth from Divorce , that lady gets no justice and then she goes to make Youtube videos
  • When someone rich commits massive crime of financial type , they get to go to UK to get treated
  • Group of Lawyers attack a cardiology center , attack patients and doctors , no lawyers get jailed or their licenses revoked
  • When a R***i goes to Qauid-e-Azam's grave and rants and creates a circus , a man who is dead can't rest in peace becasue this lady lies and cheat . The courts state , no case she is innocent , Tomorrow she will be jumping like a Kangaroo on the grave , were they expecting Qauid-e-Azam to get out of his grave and log a case against these creatures in court ???

When Tax people chase illegal acts , the Business centers catch fire and courts stay quiet

Courts Focus:

  • Wear the stupid wig
  • Stupid tea biscuit culture and perks
  • Need Driver and Nukar for kitchen
  • All Expense paid vacations
  • Lot of Days off
  • Free Education for Kids
  • Free Car , that is Must for Judges

And ....of course , eagerly signing the bail orders !!! for Criminals



One court gives judgement against you
You go next court
That court gives order against you
You go next court
Then that court gives order against you
You go next court
Eventually you get to court that agrees with you , and you come out happy as winner and Go to UK



If anyone asks , what exactly the courts do ? Then the Judge states "CONTEMPT OF COURT "
 
Last edited:

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Total: 1, Members: 0, Guests: 1)


Top Bottom