Islamabad court reserves verdict on Shahbaz Gill’s judicial remand in sedition case
An Islamabad district and sessions court on Wednesday reserved its verdict on a evaluate plea looking for the judicial remand of PTI senior leader Shahbaz Gill in a sedition case filed towards him, after the completion of arguments by using all parties.
The sessions judge Zeba Chaudhry had taken up the case for rehearing this morning folllowing the orders of the Islamabad High Court over the government’s plea difficult the dismissal of Gill’s physical remand by way of the duty magistrate.
Lawyers Salman Safdar and Faisal Chaudhry representing Gill — who has been in the back of the bars since last Tuesday (August 9) — seemed in court.
At the outset of the hearing, Special Prosecutor Rizwan Abbasi informed the court that the judicial magistrate remanded Gill into police custody for two days however the investigation officer requested for an extension in the remand.
He stated that the duty magistrate ought to have viewed all components of the matter however he rejected the request.
“How did he [magistrate] take Gill’s statement for the ultimate statement?” he asked.
Abbasi maintained that a remand of at least 10 days is granted in regular instances while this is a case of criminal conspiracy.
He contended that the accused PTI leader is telling lies again and again and, therefore, further interrogation and a polygraph test is required.
The distinct prosecutor further stated that Gill has already confessed that his driver has one of his cell phones.
“The IO clearly wrote in the plea that it’s not simply about the healing [of the phone] however there are different aspects that want to be investigated,” he said.
After the completion of the arguments by way of special prosecutor, Gill’s lawyer Salman Safdar gave arguments. He maintained that the case in opposition to Gill is based on malafide intent and political revenge because he mentioned the names of 9 PML-N leaders along with Maryam Nawaz, Ayaz Sadiq and others.
He complained that some factors of the foundation of seeking remand have been stored secret while the case report hasn’t been furnished to the defence.
He stated that it needs to be ascertained why the police want Gill to be remanded.
“The case has been based on the selection of words and speech […] and the police have the speech.”
He additionally raised objection over the admissibility of the case, announcing that the complainant is a magistrate who filed the case on behalf of the bureaucracy and military but a treason case can’t be filed except the permission of the federal government.
Moreover, he stated that the sections imposed in the case are of capital punishment and life imprisonment, asking “if these sections are aplicable on such a speech.”
“Gill made some incorrect statements however matters could be incorrect however they do not come under treason or criminal conspiracy,” he said.
Gill’s lawyer additionally contended that Gill had been remanded for three days and the request wasn’t turned down immediately. He stated that the IO failed to complete the investigation in three days while the forensic department had sent the reports within 24 hours.
