Security personnel escort former prime minister Imran Khan as he arrives to appear at the Lahore High Court on March 17, 2023. — AFP

ISLAMABAD — Chief Justice of Pakistan, Umar Ata Bandial, expressed concerns on Wednesday regarding the rushed judgment delivered by the trial court against former Prime Minister Imran Khan in the Toshakhana case.

The remarks were made during a hearing at the Supreme Court, where a petition filed by Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) Chairman Khan was being reviewed. The petition challenged the verdict of the Islamabad High Court (IHC), which had decided to keep the Toshakhana case within its jurisdiction, dismissing Khan's plea to transfer the case to another court.

Earlier in August, the IHC had nullified a sessions court's verdict that questioned the admissibility of the case involving alleged corrupt practices related to a state gift repository. The case implicated Imran Khan, who was subsequently sentenced to three years in prison.

The current hearing was attended by a three-member bench led by Chief Justice Bandial, joined by Justice Sayyed Mazahar Ali Akbar Naqvi and Justice Jamal Khan Mandokhel.

During the hearing, Khan's lawyer, Latif Khosa, presented arguments before the court. The Chief Justice criticized the trial court's hurried verdict, emphasizing that the judge had issued the order in haste.

Khosa highlighted that Khan had filed three appeals against the high court's decision. The case also involved allegations of misdeclaration of assets. In response to a question by Justice Naqvi, Khosa referred to specific sections of the Election Act, 2017, explaining that members of the assembly did not possess the authority to file references against fellow parliamentarians.

Justice Naqvi questioned the legality of assembly members submitting references against their peers. Khosa clarified that such authority lay with the National Assembly speaker, not individual members. He further noted that the Election Commission of Pakistan could only take action against a Member of the National Assembly within 120 days of the submission of financial statements.

The Chief Justice interjected, pointing out that the primary issue was the jurisdiction of the case and the challenge to the Islamabad High Court's decision. He reminded Khosa that the case was already pending in another court.

The hearing also brought to light the fact that the trial court had made its decision within a single day, despite the Islamabad High Court's request for a decision within seven days. Chief Justice Bandial expressed concern over the haste with which the trial court judge had arrived at the verdict.

Amidst the arguments, the Supreme Court ordered the high court to review the request for the suspension of Khan's sentence, highlighting the serious points raised during the proceedings.

The hearing was adjourned to the following day, and the Chief Justice concluded by stating that they would not interfere in the Toshakhana case during that session. Instead, they would await the outcome of the high court's hearing and then resume the discussion.

In his petition, Khan had urged the Supreme Court to overturn the high court's order and to prevent the trial court from proceeding until a verdict on the new petition was reached. The petition also questioned the IHC's decision to allow the trial judge to rehear the case after having declared it maintainable.

The Chief Justice's remarks and the ensuing discussions shed light on the intricacies of the Toshakhana case and its legal proceedings, indicating the nuanced nature of the legal arguments presented. The matter continues to be of significant interest to the public and legal experts alike.

Socail Media Point Youtube Channel

Blog Topics