Home TRENDING QURESHI’S BAIL APPLICATIONS IN BOTH CASES ARE DENIED BY THE ATC.

QURESHI’S BAIL APPLICATIONS IN BOTH CASES ARE DENIED BY THE ATC.

QURESHI'S BAIL APPLICATIONS IN BOTH CASES ARE DENIED BY THE ATC.

SHARE

ISLAMABAD:
On Friday, an ATC denied former foreign minister Shah Mahmood Qureshi’s request for interim parole and a waiver of his mandatory court presence.

PTI Vice Chairman Shah Mahmood Qureshi is interacting with the media after his release from Adiala Jail on June 6, 2023. SCREENGRAB

The deputy chairman of the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) had two no-show cases filed against him at the Kahna police station, and the judge denied his requests for temporary bail in both cases.

After hearing arguments from both parties, Judge Abul Hasnat Zulqarnain issued his ruling.

Ali Bukhari, who represents Qureshi in his Cipher case, has submitted two motions asking the court to exempt his client from appearing in court for one day and to summon him.

And he had petitioned the court for an interim bail for Qureshi.

The prosecutor asked the judge to deny bail for Qureshi during the hearing. Bukhari argued that his client “has been sent to jail on court orders” and was therefore not purposefully absent.

The attorney insisted that he was not seeking “extraordinary relief” for his client but rather an exemption from attendance, citing the judge’s obligation to consider “the whole picture” in making a decision.

However, the prosecutor argued that the Supreme Court had mandated the accused’s attendance for bail before arrest. As his lawyer put it, “if he was intentionally absent, then the bail could be dismissed” in reference to the PTI vice chairman.

After hearing evidence from both sides, the judge put off making a ruling.

The court then denied Qureshi’s request for interim bail and denied his requests for an exemption and a summons. In order to be arrested, the accused must be present at the bail hearing, according to the law.

The former minister is being held in Adiala Jail on judicial remand in connection with an Official Secrets Act, 1923 case involving a lost cypher.

SHARE