Court issues notification to ECP, different respondents; plans hearing for June 8
ISLAMABAD:
The Islamabad High Court (IHC) requested a neighborhood court on Friday to stop prosecution procedures against Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) boss and previous head Imran Khan in the Toshakhana (gift store) case.
Imran had recorded a request with the high court testing the viability of criminal procedures against him in the Toshakhana case, documented by the Political Race Commission of Pakistan (ECP).
IHC Boss Equity Aamer Farooq managed the meeting and gave the stay request, as well as notification to the ECP among different respondents.
The court has delayed the procedures until the following month, and gave notification to Imran on each of the four of his applications too.
Outstandingly, the applications had come as the PTI boss was prosecuted for the situation two days prior. The preliminary court had gathered the observers on May 13.
The arraignment hearing for the Toshakhana case had been held at the New Police Line Visitor House after the consultation for the Al-Qadir Trust case, in which the PTI boss was captured from the Islamabad High Court (IHC) on May 9.
Addressing the media after the becoming aware of the case, Imran’s attorney Sher Afzal Marwat had said that the previous state head and legal advisors had boycotted the arraignment procedures.
He had kept up with that the court prosecuted the PTI boss in spite of his communicating an absence of trust in the appointed authority hearing the case.
It could be noted here that on May 5, extra meetings judge Humayun Dilawar had excused two petitions recorded by the PTI head testing criminal procedures against him in the Toshakhana case in the wake of hearing contentions from the two sides.
During the procedures at the IHC today, Imran’s legal counselor Khawaja Haris contended that he ECP’s protest isn’t permissible on the grounds that no letter has been presented by the electing guard dog to name a skilled power.
“The ECP has just requested that its office record the grumbling, and a grievance documented without the able authority can’t be heard,” he said, adding that “protests can’t be sent for horrific act after the recommended time fo 120 days.”
The legal advisor informed the court that the issue had been raised with the preliminary court also, notwithstanding, the adjudicator had said that they will be tended to during the proof phase of the procedures.
“Our contention is that no further move can be made on the grumbling,” he pushed.
He further said that “we are having a problem with whatever is on record. The question of criminal procedures ought to initially go to the justice and afterward to the meetings court.”
“The grievance must be first documented with the officer and afterward he needs to record the initial assertion and send it to the meetings court,” Imran’s legal advisor said.
After hearing the contentions, CJ Farooq gave notification to concerned parties and deferred the procedures until June 8.
